IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18124 of 2008 1. RAM PRAKASH RAVIDAS, S/O LATE GOVIND RAVIDAS, R/O AT AND P.O.-WARSALIGANJ, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, P.S.-WARSALIGANJ, DISTRICT NAWADA, AT PRESENT HEAD CLERK, ROAD DIVISION NO.1, GAY, DEPUTED AT STATE HIGHWAY DIVISION, NAWADA. 2. SURESH KUMAR RAJAK, S/O LATE DHURKHELI RAJAK, R/O MOHALLA MOGALKUAN, NEAR NALANDA HEALTH CLUB, (D.D.C., RESIDENCE), P.S.- BIHARSHARIF, DISTRICT NALANDA, AT PRESENT POSTED AS II GRADE ASSISTANT AT MAGADH CIRCLE, R.C.D., GAYA, DEPUTED AT NAWADA ROAD DIVISION AS HEAD CLERK. 3. DILIP KUMAR, S/O LATE MOSAFIR SINGH, R/O VILLAGE-MOHAMADPUR, P.S.-HASUA, DISTRICT- NAWADA. 4. SIDHESHWAR MEHTA, S/O LATE PRASAD MEHTA, R/O MOHALLA-GAUTAM BUDH COLONY, DHANIA BAGICHA, P.S.-DELHA, DISTRICT-GAYA, AT PRESENT HEAD CLERK, ROAD DIVISION, AURANGABAD AT ROAD DIVISION, GAYA. 5. MAHESH SINGH, S/O LATE MUNDRIKA SINGH, R/O MOHALLA-SRIKRISHNAPURI, LAKHIBAG, NEAR BULLA SHAHID, P.S.-MANPUR, DISTRICT-GAYA. ………………PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF-CUM-SPECIAL SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, PATNA. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, MAGADH ROAD CIRCLE, GAYA. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, ROAD DIVISION NO.1, GAYA. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, NAWADA DIVISION, NAWADA. 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, ROAD DIVISION NO.1, AURANGABAD. …………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2 07.01.2011 Petitioners have filed this writ application for quashing of Annexure-11 which is an office order dated 11.11.2008 of the 2 office of the Superintending Engineer, Magadh Road Circle, Gaya, by which all the promotions granted to the petitioners have been cancelled. It is pleaded in paragraph 16 of the writ application that no show cause was issued to the petitioners before cancellation of their all promotions by the Executive Engineer by the impugned order. The petitioners have also given a long list of employees in paragraph 20 and 21 of the writ application, in respect of whom, they plead that their promotions, granted in similar circumstances, have not been interfered with. A counter affidavit has been filed in the case, but there is no pleading in the counter affidavit that any show cause notices were issued to the petitioners before their all promotions were cancelled. There is also no reply of the pleadings made by the petitioners in respect of large number of other persons who are also said to have been granted promotions in similar circumstances which they are still enjoying. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the cases of the petitioners are covered by a Full Bench judgment of this 3 Court reported in 2000 (4) PLJR 262, and also covered by circulars of the Government contained in letter nos.4178 dated 12.8.1992, 465 dated 13.2.1995 as well as 8601 dated 14.12.2000. Since there is no reply to the pleadings of the petitioners that no show cause notice was issued to them before cancellation of the said promotions, the order of the promotion, as contained in Annexure-11, is quashed solely on the ground of violation of Principles of Natural Justice. If the respondents decide to proceed in the matter afresh, they must give individual show cause notices to the petitioners and consider their reply and thereafter only may pass fresh orders. The writ application is allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions. Arvind/ ( J. N. Singh, J.)