IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13456 of 2010 1. SRI AMRENDRA KUMAR S/O SRI BASISTHA SHARMA , C/O SRI TUNTUN SHARMA SOUTH CHANDMARI ROAD, AZAD NAGAR, ROAD NO.1, P.O.LOHIA NAGAR, P.S.KANKARBAGH, DISTT-PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA ----------- 2. 30.9.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. It is the case of the petitioner that in pursuance of a regular process of selection he was offered appointment on the post of Group-D in the Parliamentary Affairs Department by letter dated 10.8.2010 requiring him to join on 11.8.2010. The petitioner joined. Certain subsequent instructions appear to be putting his job at stake compelling him to approach the Court. The counter affidavit of the respondents in Paragraph-11 specifically acknowledges that the petitioner had joined. It seeks to suggest that the letter dated 10.8.2010 was not an appointment letter but a call for verification of certificates. Counsel for the State submits that the government retains the discretion subject to verification and there could be no error for the Court 2 to interfere in light of the Chief Secretary’s letter appended at Annexure ‘A’ to the counter affidavit that the appointment letter was issued by the concerned days prior to his voluntary retirement took effect. If the respondents admit that the petitioner had joined in pursuance of the letter dated 10.8.2010, the only ground on which it could be stayed was the joining was provisional or may not amount to a joining or if the respondents were not satisfied of his original caste and educational qualifications or if he did not submit a photograph or any variance was found in the document or photograph as that contained in his original application. Any other ground if urged by the respondents, amounts to termination. The procedure for termination is then required to be followed. Be that as it may, counsel for the petitioner produces a notification dated 6.8.2010 issued by the General Administration Department of the State Government. It states that the voluntary retirement of the then incumbent respondent no. 3, and which is the sole justification urged from Annexure-A to the counter affidavit, was being recalled and his joining 3 was to be accepted in the department again. The submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the very substratum of the stand of the respondents from Annexure-A to the counter affidavit, the note of the Chief Secretary dated 11.8.2010 vanishes. Let a copy of the notification dated 16.9.2010 produced during submission be kept on record. Counsel for the State fairly submits that if Annexure-A no mere survives as is sought to be urged by the petitioner, there may not be sufficient justification for the respondents not to utilize the services of the petitioner. The application is disposed in the aforesaid terms for appropriate orders and/or directions by respondent no. 2 within a maximum period of 10 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)