IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.416 of 2009 ====================================================== Roshan Zameer, S/o Md. Wahidul Haque, resident of Village – Birpur, P.O. Kairi Bishanpur, P.S. Kochadhaman, District – Kishanganj. .... .... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Commissioner –cum- Secretary Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Joint Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. Director, Health Services, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. Deputy Director Health Services (Adm.) Department of Health Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. Deputy Director Health Services (U) Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 7. Civil Surgeon –cum- Chief Medical Officer, Purnea. .... .... Respondents. ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shabbir Ahmad Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Sc10) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. MRIDULA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. MRIDULA MISHRA) 05/ 23-09-2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing for the State Petitioner having LMF degree joined as Medical Officer in the District Board, Purnea on 17.6. 1960. His service was confirmed on 11.5.1962. Notification No. 668(1) dated 31.3.1980 was published, whereby Seventy Zila Parishad Dispensaries were provincialised. Out of 70 Zila Parishad Dispensaries 12 were in Purnea. Services of all staff including Medical Officers having M.B.B.S. degree working in such Patna High Court CWJC No.416 of 2009 (5) dt.23-09-2011 2 / 2 2 dispensaries were absorbed in Govt. service, but Medical Officers having LMF and LTM degree could not be absorbed, as in their case recommendation of the BPSC was essential. Since, their services were not absorbed they were not paid salary and allowances like M.B.B.S doctor from the State fund. They are also not entitled for the pension and pensionary benefits. Petitioner’s salary was fixed in non-gazetted scale with effect from 1.2.1980. Petitioner has superannuated in the year, 1990. For the first time petitioner has raised his grievances before this Court by filing the present writ application in the year, 2009. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of State delay has been taken as a main ground, for rejecting the claim of the petitioner. However, this application is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner for filing fresh representation before the concerned authority. In case such representation is filed by the petitioner, that will be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. The representation filed by the petitioner must be disposed of within eight weeks from the date of its filing. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J)