IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6259 of 2008 1.Raj Kumar Ram S/O Late Singheshwar Ram, R/O Village Bariyawan, P.S. Mali, District- Aurangabad 2.Manoj Ram, S/O Jagdip Ram, R/O Village Neema, P.S. Mali, District- Aurangabad 3.Chandan Kumar Singh S/O Vijay Prasad Singh, R/O Village- Beni, P.S. Mali, District- Aurangabad 4.Arun Pal @ Arun Kr.Pal, S/O Ram Nandan Pal, R/O Village- Amarpura, P.S. Mali, District- Aurangabad ……. Petitioners Versus 1.The State Of Bihar through Secretary Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.The District Magistrate, Aurangabad 3.The District Education Superintendent, Aurangabad 4.The Block Development Officer, Navinagar, District- Aurangabad 5.The Panchayat Secretary, Bariyawan, NaviNagar, District- Aurangabad 6.The Block Education Extension Officer, NaviNagar, District Aurangabad 7.Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Bariyawan NaviNagar, District- Aurangabad ……….. Respondents (1st set) 8.Kumari Sangita Mishra W/O Arun Pandey R/V/ Siyar Bigha, P.S. Mali, District- Aurangabad 9.Binay Prasad Bhagat, S/O Mahadev Bhagat, R/V – Etawa, P.S. Mali, District- Aurangabad 10.Santlesh Paswan, S/O Tunni Paswan, R/V- Mohar Karma, P.S. Mali, District- Aurangabad 11.Sanju Kumari, W/O Rajesh Sharma, R/V Mohar Karma, P.S. Mali, District- Aurangabad 12.Arti Kumari, W/O Abhay Singh, R/V- Mohar Karma, P.S. Mali, District- Aurangabad 13.Dharmendra Kumar Singh, S/O Sita Ram Singh, R/V- ShonbarsaKhaira, District- Aurangabad ………… Respondents (2nd set) ----------- 4. 17/08/2010 From Annexure-5 it appears that four petitioners before this Court along with one more were held not entitled for their engagement in view of their having not secured 45% marks in Intermediate 2 Examination. Therefore, earlier orders passed in their favour allowing them to continue in service were withdrawn. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the Resolution of the Human Resources Development Department contained in Memo No.2517 dated 4.7.2008, as contained in Annexure-8 with the supplementary affidavit, from which it appears that, in the light of some orders of this Court, the requirement of securing 45% marks in Intermediate Examination as essential condition for appointment was withdrawn by the Government. It is further stated in the said resolution that the Shiksha Mitras, who were earlier removed on account of such condition, were to be taken back in service and treated to be re-employed from the date of their removal. Apparently, this resolution operates retrospectively and applies also to earlier cases of termination on that ground. In the circumstances, in view of this clear cut stipulation in the said resolution, the order, as contained in Annexure-5, so far as petitioners are concerned, is quashed and 3 the respondents are directed to treat the petitioners as re-employed from the date of their removal in terms of the decision as contained in the said resolution dated 4.7.2008. The writ application is accordingly allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)