IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.191 of 2005 RAM PRAWESH SINGH & ANR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS For the Petitioners : Dr. Sadanand Jha, Sr.Adv. Mr.Subodh Paswan, Adv. For the State : Mr. Sanjay Prakash Verma, J.C. to G.A.-5. ----------- 5/ 19/9/2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 3.12.2004 which reverts them from their present Class-III posts of a Correspondence Clerk and Accounts Clerk to their original Class-IV post of a ‘Band Khalasi’ with retrospective effect. On 1.11.1971 the petitioners were appointed in work charge establishment. A Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.3706/97 was considering a similar order of reversion of persons appointed in the work charge establishment in 1975. It was, inter alia, noticed that the Government decision No.841 dated 19.2.1981, in pursuance of which the petitioners are also sought to be reverted, as was the case therein, being subsequent in nature, was not applicable to persons appointed prior to the said circular. It was further held that given the long period of time from 1975 to 1997, when in pursuance of appointment in Grade-IV and promotion to Grade-III the - 2 - petitioners had continued in service, there was no justification to revert them after such a long gap of time. It was further noticed that there was a 25% quota fixed for promotion from Class-IV in the regular establishment. Another Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.3144/05 has noticed that in 1949 a circular was issued by the Government and in terms thereof if a person engaged in the work charge establishment had worked for a period of one year or more, was required to be regularized and the post on which he was working was to be created for accommodating him. That this was a rule in terms of the proviso to Article-309 of the Constitution of India. The Rule had not been repealed or cancelled. The petitioners in terms of a Government policy decision fixing a cut-off date as 21.8.1975 was then promoted as Correspondence Clerk and Accounts Clerk. It is their specific case that they held the qualifications for the post. No counter affidavit has been filed denying this factual assertion. Even in C.W.J.C. No.3144/05 the long continuance on the Class-III post for 32 to 35 yeas prevailed upon the Court to set aside the order of reversion. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted - 3 - that the order of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.3706/97 came to be affirmed in L.P.A. No.330/98 preferred by the respondents and also in S.L.P.(Civil) No.2782/99, disposed on 15.2.1999. Learned counsel for the State relies upon a full Bench decision of this Court reported in 2007(4) P.L.J.R. 259 (Durganand Jha & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) to contend that regularization of the petitioners could have been done only on a Class-IV post and their absorption on a Class-III post was contrary to law. The show cause notice issued to the petitioners simply states that their absorption was not in consonance with law without spelling out details of the same, but sought to rely only upon certain orders of this Court without any details of the applicability thereof. The petitioner filed his reply to the show cause where he made adequate reference to the order of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.3706/97. Rather than dealing with the same, the respondents then issued a cryptic and non- speaking order without considering the grounds urged in the reply to the show cause reverting him with retrospective effect. This Court finds that before the Full Bench the issue of statutory rules under Article-309 of the Constitution, affirmed under the P.W.D. Code were - 4 - referred to, but the scope and purport of the rule inducting persons in the work charge establishment into the regular establishment after one year, considered in C.W.J.C. No.3144/05, was not adequately placed. Likewise, the orders of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.3706/97, affirmed by the L.P.A. court and the Supreme Court, was also not placed. The judgements sought to be relied upon by the respondents in the show cause does not also appear to have been placed before the Full Bench. With the profoundest respect, the decision by the Full Bench came to be delivered when all necessary materials were not placed before it and it was therefore naturally handicapped on these aspects and proceeded to decide the matters on the basis of materials only that were placed before it. This is apparent from paragraph-14 of the Full Bench decision which, while holding that employees of the work charge establishment had a separate entity than the regular establishment, did not have the benefit of proper assistance on the issue that the petitioners stood inducted into the regular establishment of Grade-IV after one year under the statutory rules and that 25% promotional quota was then available for promotion to Grade-III and in pursuance of which they acquired the status of Class-III and they now - 5 - continued in the present case also from 1981 till 2004. This Court finds no reason to take any view different from that in C.W.J.C. No.3076/97 and 3144/05. The order of reversion dated 3.12.2004 is accordingly quashed. The petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential monetary benefits which may have been denied to him by reason of the impugned order. The writ application is allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J )