IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7413 of 2003 1. SHIV KAMAL RAVIDAS, son of VAshishta Kumar, resident of village- Sindhwara, Post- Taldiha, P.S. Madanpur, District- Aurangabad. 2. Uday Ram, son of Suryanath Paswa, resident of village Nagar Thana, Aurangabad, Post- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad. 3. Dasai, Ram alias Damai Ram, son of late Padarath Ram resident of village- Kunda, Post- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad. 4. Ram Prakash Singh, son of late Devi Prasad Singh, resident of village- Betari, Post-Bhabhua, District- Kaimur. 5. Rajeshwar Paswan, son of Ramanand Ram, resident of village- Salampur, Post- Haspura, District- Aurangabad. 6. Rajesh Kumar, Son of Pattu Ram, Sharma, resident of village- Sahpur Tekari, Post-Aurangabad, District-Aurangabad. 7. Murari Kumar Singh, son of Ram Charitra Singh, resident of village- Sahpur Tekari, Road, Aurangabad, Post- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad. 8. Sheo Shankar Prasad, son of Bhunath Ram, resident of village-Murlihil Telbigha, Post- Gaya, District- Gaya. …. Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Director, Health Services, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Assistant Director, Health Services, Bihar, Patna. 6. The Regional Deputy Director of Health Service, Aurangabad. 7. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Aurangabad. …. Respondents. ----------- 5. 30.08.2010 Heard counsel for the parties. With regard to the following prayer made in this writ application; “1. That this is an application for issuance of appropriate writ(s)/direction(s) for quashing memo No. 1583, 1570, 1573,1584,1585,1578,1577 and 1574 all dated 5.7.2003 issued by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Aurangabad by which petitioners have 2 been removed from service. Further the respondents be directed to reinstate the petitioners with all service benefits and/or for any other appropriate reliefs for which the petitioners are deem fit and proper.” this Court would find that the order of termination of service of the petitioners dated 5.7.2003 as contained in Annexure- 1 series was passed by Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Aurangabad on the ground that not only prescribed procedure for such appointment on Class IV posts was totally ignored but the Government Circular prohibiting engagement of employees on daily wages was also violated by the then Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Aurangabad. Counsel for the petitioner, however with the help of Annexure-5 to the counter affidavit would try to explain the case of the petitioner no. 1 by showing that he was initially engaged on daily wages in the year 1989 and thereafter his services were regularized by Civil Surgeon on 27.1.1990 in the light of recommendation of the Selection Committee on the post of Cook. The order which has been passed in his case terminating the service records that the appointment of the petitioner was illegal 3 being in violation of the Government Circular dated 18.6.1993 banning recruitment on the post of daily wages on or after 1.8.1985. However, the same is not the case of other petitioners inasmuch as in the case of petitioner no. 2 there is a finding that he was engaged on 6.9.1988 on daily wages and thereafter the Civil Surgeon by order dated 27.11.1992 had merely given an order directing the petitioner no. 2 to work on the post of Male Ward Attendant. This aspect of the matter, in fact, has not been denied by the petitioner by producing any order of his appointment on the post of Male Ward Attendant and therefore it appears that each of the petitioners has a separate case as has been clearly spelt out in the order of termination. One more thing is clear that petitioner’s termination order was stayed by this Court on 22.8.2003 and such stay order has continued for more than 7 years. The total length of services of the petitioners being in the vicinity of more than 22 years and they have been engaged as Cook in the hospital, this Court would direct the matter to be reconsidered by Director-in-Chief of the Health Services who would decide the individual case of the 4 petitioners separately in the light of the individual representation to be filed by each of the petitioners within a period of two month from today. In case, any of the petitioners does not file such an individual representation, his case will be summarily dismissed by passing an order to this effect but if the petitioners would their individual representation and would enclose evidence to show that their appointment was made at least by the competent authority by some sort of selection, not necessarily on the basis of an advertisement in the newspaper but even otherwise, in which there were other candidates whose case were also considered while appointing the petitioners either the daily wages or while regularizing their service, the Director-in-Chief, of the Health Department, would consider the same and pass his reasoned order while doing so the Director in Chief would also examine the facts of each and every petitioners separately before taking an appropriate decision in terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. vs. Uma Devi (3) & Ors., reported in 2006(4) SCC 1 and in the case of State of Bihar vs. Upendra Narayan Singh & Ors., reported in 2009(5) SCC 65. 5 It is, however, made clear that till a final order is passed by the Director-in-Chief, the order of stay passed by this Court restraining removal of the petitioners from service would continue but as soon as the final order is passed, the same shall be given effect too by the concerned authorities of the petitioners. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ application is disposed of. Let a copy of this order be given to Mr. S.K. Ghosh, A.A.G.-II for its compliance. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)