IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.89 of 2010 BHOL MANDAL SON OF NAND LAL MANDAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE, POST- MURLI, P.S. PHULPARAS, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI............................... APPELLANT Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR PATNA. 3. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVT.OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CUM INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 5. THE COMMISSIONER, DARBHANGA DIVISION, DARBHANGA 6. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHUBANI 7. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MADHUBANI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI……….. RESPONDENTS with LPA No.137 of 2010 AMOD YADAV SON OF JAGAT YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- PATWAR, P.S. RAJNAGAR, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI……………………………. APPELLANT Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR 2 THE COMMISSIONER, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3 THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CUM INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 5. THE COMMISSIONER, DARBHANGA DIVISION, DARBHANGA 6 THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHUBANI, DISTT. MADHUNANI 7.THESUPERINTENDENTOFPOLICEMADHUBANI ,DISTRICT-MADHUBANI RESPONDEDNTS with LPA No.167 of 2010 SAROJ KUMAR PANKAJ SON OF LATE MADHUKAR MUKHIA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BADGORDIAY, P.O.- BITHUWAR, P.S. PANDAUL, DISTRIC - MADHUBANI …………………………….APPELLANT - 2 - Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CUM INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 5 THE COMMISSIONER, DARBHANGA DIVISION, DARBHANGA. 6 THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHUBANI, DISTT. MADHUBANI 7 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MADHUBANI, DISTRICT-MADHUBANI ………….RESPONDENTS with LPA No.170 of 2010 AJIT KUMAR PASWAN SON OF MISHRI PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SUGOUNA, P.S. RAHIKA, DISTRICT-MADHUBANI………………... APPELLANT Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER, HOME DEPARTMENT,GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME,GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CUM INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 5 THE COMMISSIONER, DARBHANGA DIVISION, DARBHANGA 6.THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHUBANI,DIST. MADHUBANI 7. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MADHUBANI, DISTRICT-MADHUBANI ………..RESPONDENTS with LPA No.175 of 2010 BINDESHWAR PASWAN SON OF RAM SWARUP PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BHACHHI, P.S. RAHIKA,DISTRICT DHUBANI……. APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. - 3 - 3 THE SPECIAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CUM INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 5 THE COMMISSIONER, DARBHANGA DIVISION, DARBHANGA 6 THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHUBANI 7THESUPERINTENDENTOFPOLICE, MADHUBANI……………………RESPONDENTS. --------- For the appellant :- Mrs. Namrata Mishra and Mr. Ratnakar Jha, Advocates For the State Mr. Bibhakar Tiwary,A.C. to G.P.19 (LPA 89/2010) ------------ For the appellant Mrs. Namrata Mishra, Advocate & Mr. Ratnakar Jha, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Abhay Shankar Jha & Mr. S.K.Jha, A.C. to S.C.-9. (LPA 137/2010) -------------- For the petitioner :- Mrs. Namrata Mishra,Advocate Mr. Ratnakar Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manu Shankar Mishra,G.P.X (LPA 167/2010) ------------- 3 11-2-2010 I.A. Nos.681,818,822 & 861 of 2010:- Heard the parties on the question of limitation. The delay in preferring the appeals is condoned. The I.As. stand allowed. - 4 - All these five appeals arise out of the same order of the learned single Judge, hence they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. It is not in dispute that from 1-1-1990 the post of Chaukidar which was earlier governed by Bihar Chaukidari Manual became a government post with financial benefit meant for a government servant. No doubt, earlier under the Chaukidari Manual on the basis of descent ie., relationship with the retiring Chaukidar, service used to be provided on the post of Chaukidar but appointment on the basis of descent could not be permissible after the post became a Government post. Petitioners/appellants have based their right to be given such appointment purely on compassion, on the basis of a Circular dated 20th December,1995 which has been cancelled subsequently on 11-11-2004. According to learned counsel for the appellants, the Circular was operative prior to cancellation. The authorities had made selection on that basis and appellants wanted writ to be - 5 - issued for appointment on account of such selection. Technically there may be some substance that an executive decision such as cancellation of a circular cannot be retrospective but in the present situation the issue is quite different. The Circular, since its beginning, was contrary to the equality provisions in the Constitution and hence the same cannot be implemented by the writ court only on the ground that after some judgments of this Court the State chose to cancel such a circular at a later date. Such a circular/ decision, even if it was not cancelled, could not be implemented through writ jurisdiction. In that view of the matter, we find no merit in these appeals and no good reasons to interfere with the order of the writ court. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but without costs. ( Shiva Kirti Singh,J) ( C.M. Prasad, J) - 6 - naresh