CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.115 OF 1997 In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India BINDESHWAR MAHTO, SON OF SOMAN MAHTO, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BATHNAHA, POST AND P.S. BATHNAHA, DISTRICT SITAMARHI. -------------------(Petitioner) Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF-CUM-ADDITONAL COMISSIONER-CUM SPECIAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, PATNA 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, NORTH BIHAR CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD DIVISON, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, SITAMARHI. ----------------------(Respondents) ----------- For the Petitioner : M/s. B.K. Choudhary, Sr.Adv., Kripa Nand Jha, Birendra Kumar, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, AC to SC-XI. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA V.N. Sinha, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State as also perused the contents of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos.3 to 5. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar contained in letter No.238(S) dated 20.2.1995, Annexure-1, whereunder the Superintending Engineer, Road Construction Department, North - 2 - Bihar Circle, Muzaffarpur has been informed by the under Secretary that instructions contained in letter no.7846 dated 3.11.1987 and letter no.2278 dated 20.4.1987 have not been issued from the office of the Engineer in Chief, Road Construction Department. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in compliance of instruction of the Engineer in Chief, Road Construction Department contained in letter no.7846 dated 3.11.1987 petitioner was appointed on the post of Road Labourer in the work charge establishment of the Executive Engineer, Road Division, Sitamarhi under office order no.92 year 1987-88 bearing memo number 2187 dated 24.11.1987, Annexure-2. It is further submitted that after issue of order dated 20.2.1995, Annexure-1 payment of salary of the petitioner was stopped and as payment of salary of the petitioner was stopped, he moved this court by filing the present writ petition praying inter alia to direct the authorities of the State Government to enquire about the genuineness of letter no. 7846 dated 3.11.1987 as according to the petitioner letter no.7846 dated 3.11.1987 directing for his appointment as Road Labourer in the Road Division, Sitamarhi was issued from the office of the Engineer in Chief. 4. This Court under orders dated 25.8.1998 admitted the writ case for hearing. During the pendency of the writ case the respondent authorities have filed counter affidavit on behalf of respondent nos. 3to 5 duly affirmed by the Executive Engineer, Road Division, Sitamarhi, wherefrom it appears that authorities of the - 3 - division have accepted the position that petitioner was appointed as Road Labourer in the division in compliance of the instruction of the Engineer in Chief, Road Construction Department contained in letter no.7846 dated 3.11.1987 vide office order no.92 bearing memo no. 2187 dated 24.11.1987, Annexure-2. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that as the State Government under letter no. 238 dated 20.2. 1995 Annexure-1 informed the Superintending Engineer, North Bihar Circle Muzaffarpur that letter no.7846 dated 3.11.1987 directing the authorities to appoint the petitioner as Road Labourer was not issued by the Engineer-in-Chief, after receipt of instruction contained in letter no.238 dated 20.2.1995, Annexure-1 petitioner is not being allowed to serve as Road Labourer and is not being paid remuneration. Learned counsel submits that in the light of the order contained in Memo no. 2187 dated 24.11.1987, Annexure-2 petitioner discharged the duties of the Road Labourer in Sitamarhi Division until receipt of the copy of letter dated 20.2.1995, Annexure-1 in the said office, as such, in the light of Annexure-2 he served the division for about eight years. Before directing for the termination of the services of the petitioner, it was incumbent upon the authorities to have enquired into the genuineness of letter no. 7846 dated 3.11.1987 issued from the office of the Engineer in Chief, Road Construction Department in presence of the petitioner. 5. From the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos.3 to 5 it does not appear that any enquiry whatsoever was made by the authorities about the genuineness of letter no.7846 dated - 4 - 3.11.1987 issued from the office the Engineer in Chief, Road Construction Department. From paragraph-11 of the counter affidavit it only appears that some examination was made but who made the examination about the genuineness of letter no.7846 dated 3.11.1987 has not been stated in any of the paragraph, in the circumstances I am to conclude that no enquiry whatsoever was made about the genuineness and contents of letter no.7846 dated 3.11.1987 before issue of letter dated 20.2.1995, Annexure-1. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties, I direct the Superintending Engineer, Road Construction Department, North Bihar Circle, Muzaffarpur to produce his copy of letter no. 7846 dated 3.11.1987 on the basis of which petitioner was appointed as Road Labouror, vide Annexure-2 before the Under Secretary, Road Construction Department who issued letter dated 20.2.1995, thereafter the Under secretary should call for the relevant file and issue register as also the admitted signature of the then Engineer In Chief and with reference to the relevant materials enquire into the genuineness or otherwise of letter no.7846 dated 3.11.1987 as also about its contents. In case, letter no. 7846 dated 3.11.1987 is found to have been issued by the Engineer in Chief, Road Construction Department directing appointment of petitioner as Road Labourer, appropriate orders be passed in accordance with law, as early as possible, in any case within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the Under Secretary, Road Construction Department. As enquiry is to be made in - 5 - compliance in my order about the genuineness and contents of letter no.7846 dated 3.11.1987 it is meet and proper to observe that the statement made in letter dated 20.2.1995 Annexure-1 shall have no bearing over the enquiry made in compliance of my order. 7. With the observation aforesaid the writ application is disposed of. Patna High Court, Patna Dated 9th September,2010 NAFR/Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)