IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.183 of 2009 JAI PRAKASH CHOUDHARY . Versus THE STATE OF BIAHR & ORS . ----------- 3/ 21/06/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. A counter affidavit is stated to have been filed on behalf of respondent No.6 today which is not available on record. The Court therefore requested the counsel for the State to make available his copy for perusal so as not to hold up the proceedings. Suffice it to notice from the pleadings of the parties that the petitioner came to be regularized in service by an order dated 28.11.2006 from his daily wage appointment so made on 7.7.1981 after this Court had directed consideration of his case by the competent authority. The petitioner is now aggrieved by the order dated 29.6.2008 issued by the Executive Engineer, Public Health Division, Katihar stating that his name did not figure in the list of persons stated to have been regularized and against whose names allocation of funds had been made. Therefore, the petitioner was being reverted to the status of daily wage with effect from 1.7.2008. The order of regularization dated 2 28.11.2006 is not denied in the counter affidavit and it is not the stand of the respondents that it has been varied, modified, recalled or annulled. The impugned order reverting the petitioner to the status of a daily wager on 29.6.2008 is in apparent conflict with the order of regularization dated 28.11.2006. The counter affidavit is hardly helpful in adjudication of the present dispute. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on an order of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.15227/09 that a person regularized could not be reverted in the manner done. The order dated 29.6.2008 is accordingly set aside, but without prejudice to the rights of the respondents. The writ application is allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)