IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10058 of 2006 RAJESH KUMAR JHA s/o late Parmanand Jha, resident of village- Araji Jagat, P.S. Benipatti, District- Madhubani. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through Secretary, Health Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Commission-cum-Secretary, Health Department, govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director-in-Chief, health Services, Department of health, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.The Dy. Director of Health, Darbhanga, Division Darbhanga. 5. The Civil Surgeon-cum- Chief Medical Officer, Madhubani, District- Madhubani. 6. The Incharge Medical Officer, Rahika, District- Madhubani. with CWJC No.10466 of 2006 DILIP KUMAR JHA s/o Jiva Nand Jha, resident of village- Araji Jagat, P.S.+ P.S. Benipatti, District- Madhubani. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through Secretary, Health Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Commission-cum-Secretary, Health Department, govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director-in-Chief, health Services, Department of health, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.The Dy. Director of Health, Darbhanga, Division Darbhanga. 5. The Civil Surgeon-cum- Chief Medical Officer, Madhubani, District- Madhubani. 6. The Incharge Medical Officer, Rahika, District- Madhubani. ----------- 5 13.4.2011 The petitioners were allegedly recruited as Basic Health Workers and were dismissed in 1995. They immediately made representations to the Regional Deputy Director, Health Services and allegedly orders were passed to enquire into the matter and pending enquiry not to disturb the petitioners and several others. Apparently, this direction of Regional Deputy Director was not followed. The petitioners then represented in the year 2003 to the Director-in- Chief, Health Services clearly admitting that since 1995 they have been on - 2 - road (dismissed). These writ applications were being filed in the year 2006 challenging the orders of dismissal as passed in the year 1995 on the ground of latches , I am not inclined to interfere with the matter. However, if any Committee is considering the case of the petitioners, the Committee would take decision in the matter as soon as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order before the Committee. It is ,however, clarified that this order does not give licence to the petitioners to revive their claims if it has already been closed and is not under any investigation. With the aforesaid observations, the writ applications stand disposed of. singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)