IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14126 of 2003 POONAM KUMARI . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 10 21.02.2011 No one appears for the petitioner and the State-Respondents. Perused the record. Petitioner had earlier moved before this Court on two occasions by filing CWJC No. 8 of 1992 disposed of on 27.4.1992 and CWJC No. 378 of 1994 disposed of on 12.5.1995. These writ applications had been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs: (i) For payment of difference of arrear of pay with effect from 1.3.1989 to 1.4.1997 (ii) Promotion with effect from 5.10.1987 (Junior Selection Grade) and from 5.10.1990 (Senior selection Grade) as well as payment of salary and other benefits of promotional post since the date of promotion i.e. 5.10.1987 till date (iii) Proper maintenance of service book and upto date GPF Pass Book (Balance Statements) (iv) Payment of bonus for the year 1988- 89 2 (v) For consideration of full pay for the period 8.3.1990 to 15.8.1990 (vi) Payment of half salary for the period 31.8.1985 to 5.9.1985 (vii) Super time scale with effect from 5.10.1992 and for correction in Bill No. 38/2001-2002 of CDPO Goraul. (viii) For addition of increments for nine years, with proper allowances. The first writ application was allowed on 27.4.1992, second writ application on 12.5.1995. One more writ application had been filed which was disposed of on 22.3.1999. All these writ applications were disposed off giving liberty to the petitioner for filing representation before the concerned authority. Since the representation filed by the petitioner were not being considered, MJC No. 1093 of 1999 was filed by him. Contempt application was disposed off on 22.3.1999 considering the show cause submitted by the Opposite party (Respondents). Present writ application has been filed by the petitioner for challenging the show cause filed by the respondents in MJC No. 1093 of 1999. Petitioner has alleged that statement in the show cause were 3 misleading due to which contempt application was disposed off, which was prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner. Respondents have filed Counter affidavit in this case, from which it transpires that the petitioner’s initial appointment on the post of BAL Shayika on 17.12.1994 had been made in Bihar State Social Welfare Advisory Board by the then Chairman of the Board, Smt. Hemlata Yadav. Appointment had been made without publishing any advertisement inviting application and following the process of appointment. No Selection Committee was constituted for appointment. Roster clearance was not taken. The Chairman of the Board, without following all these processes, had made appointment. Only competent authority for making such appointment was Social Welfare Board, not the Chairman. The appointments were made ignoring the ban imposed by the Central Welfare Board. So far the direction issued in CWJC No. 1762 of 1998 dated 01.02.1999 is concerned, in compliance of it an Enquiry Committee was constituted by the Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna vide Notification contained inMemo no. 700 dated 9.6.2001. This Committee had been 4 constituted to enquire whether legal procedure had been followed in appointing 53 employees in Bihar Social Welfare Board, Patna. Petitioner being one of the employees among those 53 employees, her appointment was also enquired. The Committee submitted it’s report vide letter No. 04 (GO) 2002 dated 4.1.2002 before the Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Welfare Department, Government of Bihar. As per this report, all 53 appointments, including the appointment of the petitioner, were completely illegal, as the same had been made without following procedure for any legal appointment, on such post. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna on receipt of such enquiry report sought for an advice from Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar. A recommendation in this letter was made by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary for closing down the Bihar State Social Welfare Advisory Board and the advice of the law department Government of Bihar had also been taken and finally all 53 illegal appointees were terminated by the Officer In-charge of Bihar State Social Welfare Board, Patna vide Office order No. 2356 dated 05.05.2003. It has also been 5 stated in the counter affidavit that the Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, has closed the Bihar State Social Welfare Advisory Board with effect from 31.3.2003. The employees, who were illegally appointed by an incompetent authority, were legally terminated. In the earlier writ applications filed by petitioner there was no direction, for continuing services of illegal appointees or to pay them salary. As per direction of this Court, enquiry was conducted and Considering the enquiry report, appointments of 53 illegal appointees was terminated (including petitioner) as there was no reason for allowing them to continue in service. There was no illegality in termination order, all employees were given sufficient opportunity for filing show cause as well as for personal hearing. The Statement made in the counter affidavit has not been contradicted by the petitioner by filing reply to the counter affidavit. So far the show cause filed in MJC No. 1093 of 1999 is concerned, at this stage, there is no reason for holding that statement made in the show cause was misleading. The petitioner must have been served with the show cause for an obvious reason. Despite service of show cause, 6 those statements were not controverted by the petitioner and only after hearing the parties any order would have been passed in the contempt application. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, relief prayed by the petitioner, in the present writ application, cannot be allowed. The writ application is dismissed. A. Kumar ( Mridula Mishra, J.)