IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.854 of 1998 1. Ramashish Yadav s/o Maujelal yadav, r/o village & P.O. Sidhapkala, P.S. Ladaniyan, District – Madhubani 2. Rajeev Ranjan Srivastav s/o Adya Sharan Srivastava, r/o Mohalla Jai Prakash Nagar, P.S. Jakkanpur, District – Patna 3. Hare Ram Singh s/o Ramadhar Singh, r/o village – Bisikalan, P.S. Dinara, District – Rohtas, at present residing at Punaichak, P.S. Shastri Nagar, District – Patna 4. Vijay kumar Singh s/o Ramashray Singh, r/o village – Amai, P.s. Piro, District – Bhojpur, at present c/o R.N. Singh, C & A. Colony, North Shastri Nagar, P.S. Shastri Nagar, District – Patna ……….. Appellants Versus 1. The Bihar Public Service Commission, Bailey Road, Patna through its Chairman 2. The Chairman, BPSC, Bailey Road, Patna 3. The Administrative Officer, BPSC, Bailey Road, Patna 4. The Secretary, BPSC, Bailey Road, Patna 5. Shri Ramashray Yadav, Ex- Chairman, Bihar Public Service commission, resident of Mohalla – Shivpuri behind A.N.College, Patna, P.S. Srikrishnapuri, Patna 6. Paras Nath Yadav s/o Nagina Yadav, r/o Boring Canal Road, P.S Buddha, Patna 7. Sunil kumar s/o late Kameshwar Prasad, permanent resident of Mohalla Laljitola, P.S. Gandhi Maidan, P.O. G.P.O., Patna 8. Dilip Kumar Sinha s/o Bal Kishun Prasad Sinha, r/o village – Sherullahpur, P.S. Lal bahadur Shastri Nagar, Patna 9. Om Prakash Vishwakarma s/o jagdish Vishwakarma, r/o village Khirih, P.S. Ghariya, District – Gaya 10. Rashid Akhtar s/o late Abdul Hafiz, r/o Raj Bhawan Campus, District – Patna 11. Upendra Singh s/o Ram Dayal Singh, r/o village Chanitya P.S. Bikram, District – Patna ……… Respondents ----------- For the appellants : Mr. Y. V. Giri, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mr. Lalit Kishore, AAG III For the Intervenors: Mr. Rajiv Kumar Kumar Verma, Sr. Advocate 2 Mr. Basant Kumar Tripathy, Advocate ( IA. No.1062 of 2001, IA. No.607 of 2002, IA. No.3204 of 2002, IA. No.3205 of 2002, IA No. 4445 of 2009 & IA No.362 of 2010) Mr. Amber Nath Banerjee, Advocate ( IA No.6439 of 2009 ) For the BPSC: Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Mr. Shyam Sunder Pandey, Advocates 15 2/2/2010 In this intra-court appeal the challenge is to the order of the learned Single Judge dated 8th of May, 1998 passed in CWJC. No.10085 of 1993. Be it noted, the learned Single Judge issued a number of directions as regards certain posts in the Bihar Public Service Commission (for short, “ the Commission). Clause – (vi) which is relevant for the present purpose is as follows: “ It is made absolutely clear that in case any of the 23 ad hoc employee and the petitioner fail to be included in the select panel their services will come to and end on June 30, 1999 or with the appointment of the selected candidates whichever being earlier.” When the appeal was taken up for admission the said part of the order was stayed. In course of hearing of this appeal Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned senior counsel appearing for the State 3 and Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha and Mr.Shyam Sunder Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the Bihar Public Service Commission have apprised us that the Commission has conferred the status of regular employee on the appellants as well as other similarly situated employees. In essence not a single employee has been removed from the service. It is also urged by them that in pursuance of the direction issued by the learned Single Judge a selection process was taken up and the selected candidates have been appointed. At this juncture, Mr. Rajiv Kumar Verma, Senior Advocate and Mr. Basant Kumar Tripathi, Advocate, who represent some of the intervenors submitted that they have no objection if the appellants and similarly situated employees, who have been declared unsuccessful in the examination held in pursuance of the order of the learned Single Judge, are conferred the status of regular employees but they should not be treated senior to those who have been declared successful in the examination. On a query being made Mr. Y.V.Giri, 4 learned Senior Counsel for the appellants, Mr. Ambar Nath Banerjee, Advocate, who also represents some of the intervenors, and Mr. Madhuresh Prasad, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.6, fairly stated that they do not intend to claim any seniority over the successful candidates who have cleared the examination held in pursuance of the order of the learned Single Judge. In view of the aforesaid, nothing remains to be adjudicated in this writ petition and it is disposed of on terms of concession given by both sides. There shall be no order as to costs. Neyaz/ (Dipak Misra, CJ.) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)