IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5877 of 2009 SRI KANT KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2/ 12/05/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed on 4.1.1984 as a B.C.G. Technician on a regular pay-scale against a sanctioned post by the competent authority, the Civil Surgeon, Gaya. As late as 20.10.2000 the respondents in their wisdom sought to reopen his appointment when a report came to be submitted by the Additional Collector, Gaya that the appointment was legal and valid, appended at Annexure- 4. Notwithstanding the same, after much passage of time his appointment came to be terminated on 27.6.2003. He came to this Court in C.W.J.C. No.7930/03 in which initially the order of termination was stayed and finally the writ application was allowed. The State went in appeal. L.P.A. No.946/03 was disposed referring the matter to a committee. The committee ex parte held the petitioner to be a forged appointee ignoring the earlier report of the Additional Collector dated 20.10.2000 and without opportunity to the petitioner to place the report 2 before the authorities. The person at Serial No.1 of the impugned order dated 5.1.2009 one Nawal Kishore Singh, while the petitioner stands at Serial No.3, came to this Court in C.W.J.C. No.4797/09 which was allowed on 16.4.2009. Learned counsel for the State is unable to meet the mark similarity between the case of the petitioner and that of the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.4797/09 including the earlier enquiry into the validity of the appointment ignored in the subsequent order of termination. The writ application is allowed in similar terms as C.W.J.C. No.4797/09. KC (Navin Sinha, J.)