IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1739 of 2007 Vishwanath Roy S/O Sri Ram Autar Roy, Resident of village Shiv Nagar, P.S. Katra District Muzaffarpur Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Sri Deepak Kumar, the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. Dr. Geeta Prasad, Director-in-Chief of Health Service, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Dr. Narendra Prasad Singh, the Regional Deputy Director, Health Services, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 4. Dr. Akhauri Ramesh Chandra Sinha, the Commissioner Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 5. Dr. Dharmdeo Singh, the Civil Surgeon-cum- Chief Medical Officer, Muzaffarpur. 6. Dr. Ganga Narayan Singh, the Medical Officer- in-charge, Health Centre Aurai, Muzaffarpur. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate & Ajay Kumar. For the Respondents 1to 6 : Mrs. Nilu Agrawal, G.A. X & Mrs. Nirmala Kumar, J.C. to G.A.X ------------ P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ------------ Dated, the 14th November, 2008. By this contempt application (M.J.C.) the petitioner has raised a grievance that the judgment and order of this Court passed in group of Letters Patent Appeals and Writ Petitions on 26th June, 2006 (particularly Letters Patent Appeal preferred by him) has not been complied with. - 2 - 2. By the order dated 26th June, 2006, Division Bench of this Court disposed of 819 Letters Patent Appeals and Writ Petitions by a common order. The relevant portion of the order reads thus: “ After marathon arguments, fortunately the differences on issues of law were greatly reconciled because the parties by consensus agreed that in view of over all factual profile of these cases the recent judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Uma Devi & Ors., reported in 2006(2) PLJR (SC) 363, shall govern the cases of the affected employees and the legal issues shall be treated to have been settled by the law declared by the constitution Bench in the aforesaid judgment. In view of such consensus on the part of lawyers appearing for the affected employees and the counsel for the State, the task of deciding these Letters Patent Appeals and Writ Petitions has become considerably easy because the learned counsels for the affected employees accepted that the Letters Patent Appeals as well as the Writ Petitions be disposed of with a direction to the government of Bihar in the Department of Health to scrutinize the cases of the affected employees afresh on the basis of relevant materials and in view of law declared by the aforesaid constitution Bench judgment so as to find out the cases of those affected employees which can be termed only as irregular appointments and not illegal appointments and then take steps to regularize the services of such irregularly appointed employees as a one time measure in accordance with the aforesaid judgment and particularly, in accordance with observations and directions given by the Apex Court in paragraph 44 of the said judgment. It is useful to notice that in paragraph 44 of the said judgment the Apex Court has clarified the exceptional situation in which only irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) of duly qualified persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts may be considered for regularization if such employees have continued to work for ten years or more without intervention of orders of courts or of tribunals. The Apex Curt explicitly directed the Union of India, the State Governments and their instrumentalities to take steps to regularize as a one time measure, the services of such irregularly appointed, who have worked for 10 years or more in duly sanctioned posts without cover of orders of courts or of tribunals. Along with such direction to the various Governments and their instrumentalities the Apex Court directed them to ensure - 3 - that regular recruitments are undertaken to fill those vacant sanctioned posts that require to be filled up, in cases where temporary employees or daily wagers are being now employed. This process has been directed to be set in motion within six months from the date of the judgment i.e. 10.4.2006. On behalf of the State also it was accepted and agreed that the cases of all the affected employees shall be considered by the authorities of the Health Department in accordance with law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi, noticed above, particularly, in the light of observations and directions in paragraph 44 of the said judgment. The State agreed to complete the exercise in respect of at least the affected employees impleaded before this Court within a reasonable period which has been accepted by the State to be six months from today. It is made clear that if the exercise is not completed within the period of six months on account of any reason, the State of Bihar in the Department of Health would be obliged to file an application disclosing all the relevant reasons for seeking extension of the aforesaid time period. In view of the discussion made above and on account of disposal of these matters on the basis of consensus, as noticed above, the prayers made in several Letters Patent Appeals for condonation of limitation are allowed and the delay in preferring the appeals is condoned. Rule in that matter is made absolute without any order as to cost. All the Letters Patent Appeals whether preferred by the State or by affected employees and all the Writ Petitions preferred by the affected employees are hereby disposed of by this common judgment and order with a direction to the authorities of the Health Department, Government of Bihar to reconsider the cases of all the affected employees with a view to find out on the basis of relevant facts and law as settled by the Constitution Bench in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi (supra) as to which of such affected employees are fit for regularization in terms of that judgment, particularly in terms of paragraph 44 of the judgment. Such exercise should be completed within a period of six months from today. If for any good reason, the time period is required to be extended then the respondent State must file an application for that purpose and seek extension from this Court. Till the process is completed, the State of Bihar and its authorities shall maintain status quo in respect of services of the affected - 4 - employees as existing on date. The status quo shall get revised by the orders that may be passed by the authorities in respect of affected employees as a result of the exercise to be undertaken by them and their final decision in the light of this judgment and order. Before parting with this judgment and order, it is considered relevant to observe that recently a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 3349 of 2000 (Yogendra Singh & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) was disposed of by judgment dated 9.5.2006 rendered by one of us, Shiva Kirti Singh, J. in which reliance was placed upon the aforesaid Constitution Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi for directing the State Government to consider the cases of petitioners of that case for regularization as a one time measure, if their cases meet the requirements laid down in the aforesaid judgment. As observed in that judgment, here also it is clarified that the authorities of Health Department, Government of Bihar while considering the cases of affected employees in these cases, may consider and take decision as per law in respect of similarly situated other employees of the Department, if any, and for that category of similar situated employees, the Department may issue public notice etc. if it is so advised. But they must be conscious of the judgment of the Apex Court, as noticed above, that the exercise of regularization is only a one time measure for the whole Department and no such further exercise will be permissible after the one time measure is resorted to and completed within a reasonable period. Thereafter, the vacancies must be filled up as per requirement of the Department in regular manner as per direction of the Apex Court. “ 3. Government Advocate submits that pursuant to the aforesaid decision, the State Government constituted a Committee for resolving the issue in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Uma Devi (Supra) and the judgment of this Court. 4. It transpires from the record that the State Government made an application before this Court vide M.J.C. No. 671 of 2007 seeking extension of time for the disposal of the matters, reference to which has been made in the order dated 26th June, 2006. By that time, - 5 - some of the matters have already been considered by the said Committee and some matter remained to be considered. The said M.J.C. was disposed of by this Court on dated 2nd November, 2007. 5. We are now informed by the Government Advocate that cases of all concerned including that of the applicant have been considered by the Committee pursuant to the order of this Court dated 26th June, 2006. It appears that in so far as the applicant is concerned, he has not been communicated with the decision arrived at by the Committee as an outcome of scrutiny of his case pursuant to the order dated 26th June, 2006. Government Advocate submits that within three weeks from today, the decision taken in the matter relating to the applicant shall be communicated to him positively. 6. We accept her statement and in view thereof we are satisfied that nothing further needs to be done in this contempt application. It is disposed of accordingly. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J AMIN/-