IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3982 of 2005 RAM GANESH PRASAD SINGH S/O LATE RAM JANAM SINGH R/O VILL-USARI, PO-& PS- DAWATHA, DISTT- ROHTAS PRESENTLY RESIDING AT GANDAK PROJECT COLONY,GITWARPUR PS & DISTT.-SAMATIPUR-------------PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECY. DEPTT. OF WATER RESOURCES BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF (NORTH) WATER RESOURCES DEPTT. BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT. SAMASTIPUR ZONE, SAMASTIPUR 5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, DRAINAGE CIRCLE, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT. SAMASTIPUR 6. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER DESIGN CIRCLE, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT.SAMASTIPUR 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DESIGN DIVISION NO.3, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT SAMASTIPUR 8. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DRAINAGE DIVISION, DISTRICT- SAAMATIPUR---------------------RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh, Sr.Advocate For the State: Mr. S.P.Verma, AC to GA-5 ------------ 3 24.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner wants quashing of the order dated 3.12.2004 by virtue of which the petitioner has been reverted to Class IV post from Class III post of Accounts Clerk which the petitioner was prior to reversion order contained in annexure-1. According to the petitioner the benefit of promotion was granted to him way back on 17.7.1981 and the same is sought to be undone after more than two decades. Petitioner raises serious objection to the validity of such order on many a grounds. There is no reason or scope for this court to consider the matter afresh in the light of the decision which has been rendered by the Full Bench in the case of Durganand Jha & others vrs. The State of Bihar & others along with analogous cases - 2 - reported in 2007 (4) PLJR 259. Since the Full Bench has already held, keeping the nature of the engagement or employment under the work charge establishment as well as the fact that if the engagement of an employee was on Class IV post his absorption on Class III post cannot be allowed as it is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The Full Bench decision being what it is this Court has difficulty in entertaining this writ application whatever be the question of law or distinction being made before this Court by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. Even the so called Division Bench decision of this Court seems to be contrary to the view of the Full Bench decision. This writ application is dismissed on this score alone. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)