IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.997 of 2007 Binod Kumar Jha & Ors Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- with Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1052 of 2007 Niranjan Kumar Ghosh Versus State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- with Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.290 of 2009 Shambhu Nath Mishra Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors 25 16.11.2011 All these contempt applications arise out of the common order dated 27.2.2007 passed in C.W.J.C. No.4916 of 2005 heard analogous with C.W.J.C. No.6932 of 2005. In the writ petitions the petitioners sought direction to the State Government to implement its 1993 policy wherein a promise was made that all daily wagers working on perennial post prior to April, 1985 would be absorbed against future vacancies. The learned Single Judge vide common order dated 27.2.2007 observed that the State Government is bound by its policy decision to give appointment to all such persons working prior to April, 1985 and entitled to be appointed on the basis of criteria laid down in the said policy. The learned Judge further observed that the objective of advertisements issued consequent to the policy was to locate the eligible candidate and to verify their credentials as to whether they would come within the policy of the State Government. The Divisional Commissioner, Bhagalpur would do the necessary roaster clearance.Further more, the list containing the candidates to be 2 appointed against future vacancies would not die its natural death. The petitioners submit that there are enough vacancies which are sufficient to accommodate the petitioner as well as other similarly placed. On 14.9.2009 the District Magistrate, Bhagalpur personally appeared in the court and sought two months’ time to take appropriate steps in the matter. The District Magistrate stated that vacancies contained in Annexure-C to the show cause related to the State Government with respect to which the roaster clearance would have to come from those departments. A supplementary show cause has been filed on behalf of the District Magistrate, Bhagalpur on 11.8.2001. In paragraph 6 thereof it has been stated that pursuant to the advertisement published on 2.12.2011, a panel comprising 600 applicants were constituted in the year 2004. In view of the direction of this court dated 27.2.2007 passed in C.W.J.C. No.4916 of 2005 analogous with C.W.J.C. No.6932 of 2005, the District Selection Committee held several meetings and recommended candidates named in the list for their appointments in different department heads in the district. About 119 candidates named in the list have already been recommended for their appointment. Further more out of 8 petitioners in M.J.C. No.997 of 2007, one Binod Kumar Jha (petitioner no.1), Bhikhari Mandal (petitioner no.2), Dilip Kumar Mahto (petitioner no.3), Sudhir Mandal (Petitioner no.4), Kamdeo Mandal (Petitioner no.7) and Md. Sattar (Petitioner no.8) have already been appointed. It was stated that Shanti Kumari (Petitioner no.5) and Shashi Shekhar Trivedi (Petitioner no.6) have not been recommended for their appointment as 3 their names stood at Sl. No.166 and 120 in BC and general category respectively. It has been stated in paragraph 10 of the supplementary show cause that the petitioner Niranjan Kumar Ghosh in M.J.C. No.1052 of 2007 and Shambhu Nath Mishra in M.J.C.No.290 of 2009 have not been recommended as their names stood at Sl. No.132 and 461 respectively. In paragraph 13 it has been stated that recommendations for appointment can be made only when requisition is made to the Appointment Committee. It has been further stated that so far as vacancies in Water Resources Department are concerned, the same is to be filled up by the adjustment/regularisastion of daily wage workers as per guide lines contained in General Administration department resolution no.639 dated 16.3.2006. It is further submitted by the State Counsel that the daily wagers working in Water Resources Department, Bhagalpur was covered in M.J.C.No.2840 of 2010 (Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Bihar & Ors) in which the Hon’ble High Court directed the deponent to make recommendations against vacant post before 29.6.2011. As such the name of Shambhu Nath Mishra was not recommended for appointment against the vacancy of Water Resources Department. Further more, the names of 24 panelists were recommended for appointment in the Engineering College, Bhgalpur. However, only 10 vacancies in general category were requisitioned by the Director, Science and Technology. The petitioners’ name could not be recommended as he was lower down in the panel. Though there could be some procedural delays depending upon the vacancies and making of requisition, nonetheless the 4 respondent authorities are to take steps in accordance with the order dated 27.2.2007, passed in C.W.J.C. No.4916 of 2005 analogous with C.W.J.C. No.6932 of 2005 expeditiously to fill up the vacancies preferably within six months. With the aforesaid directions, these contempt applications are disposed of. KHAN (S.P.Singh,J)