IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11806 of 2009 BINAY KUMAR JHA . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2 12.11.2009 Heard Counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 9.9.2008 prepared by the High Level Committee constituted in the light of the direction by the High Court in LPA No. 946 of 2003 (The State of Bihar and others Vs. Purendra Sulan Kit and others). The High Level Committee scrutinized the cases of several Class III and Class IV employees working in the Health Department and terminated from their service on the ground that they were not validly appointed. In its report the Committee has fixed the services of the petitioner in the illegal category. Petitioner’s case is that the Committee for scrutinizing the validity of appointment of different employees fixed guidelines for putting 2 him in illegal, forged and irregular category. In the case of the petitioner standard, fixed by the Committee has been ignored. The Committee had decided that employees who fulfilled four criterions will be put in irregular category. Petitioner’s case is that those four criterions related to appointment sanctioned post, having requisite qualification, appointment by the competent authority and continuation on the post for more than ten years without any intervention of the Court’s order. Petitioner fulfilled all four criterions, and thus was entitled for being put in the irregular category. Ignoring all these, he was put in illegal category. It is also submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that his case is fully covered by the recent judgment of this Court in CWJC No. 6575 of 2009 and analogous cases, wherein the cases of similarly situated employees of the Health Department have been decided and 3 the inquiry report quashed considering it on different grounds. I find that for the reasons stated above and also that the case of petitioner was fully covered by the judgment of this Court passed in CWJC No. 6575 of 2009 and analogous cases, the inquiry report submitted against the petitioner is quashed. Petitioner’s case as per the guidelines of the inquiry report itself should have been put in irregular category, in that case, there is specific direction for his reinstatement on the post. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner on the post with consequent benefits. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the writ application stands disposed of. (Mridula Mishra,J.) A.Kumar