IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9673 of 2003 SUBODH SHANKAR SAHAY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 5. 17.9.2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner has retired from the service of the government with effect from 28.2.1997. He claimed that he was kept waiting for posting from 1.11.1994 to 19.7.1995 for which period he was not paid salary. He represented to the respondents for regularization of the period and for payment of salary. A notice dated 26.12.2003 ( annexure 10 to the I.A. Application) was given to the petitioner by the department to furnish certain documents for information for consideration of his claim of regularization of the period waiting for posting and for payment of salary. It is apparent that the petitioner could not furnish required documents. Therefore, order was passed on 16.1.2004 vide annexure-11 rejecting his claim for regularization. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since during the period he was not at his residence, he could not get the notice dated 26.12.2003 in time. He contends that the petitioner did file reply to the same, though belatedly, vide annexure-13 dated 7.2.2004. Since the order had already been passed, his reply was not considered by the respondents. Be that as it may, it is apparent that the order rejecting the claim of the petitioner for regularization of the alleged period of waiting for posting was passed without hearing the petitioner and/or without considering his representation. May be he could not file the same due to lack of knowledge of the notice in time. In the circumstances, equity 2 demands that the petitioner be given another opportunity to represent his case before the authority concerned with supporting materials for re- consideration of the same. In the circumstances, the petitioner is given an opportunity to file a comprehensive representation with all supporting documents before the respondent, Joint Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar within one month from today. If such a representation is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be considered without being prejudiced from the fact that his case has already been rejected earlier. On consideration of the representation of the petitioner and the materials produced therewith, if it is found that the petitioner has made out a case, appropriate order shall be passed in the matter as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of the said representation. If the petitioner contends before the respondents that certain documents are in exclusive possession of the respondents on which he desires to rely, the same documents shall also be called for and considered while considering the representation. With the above observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Md.S. (J.N.Singh,J.)