IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4463 of 2003 ANIL KUMAR JHA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 5/ 23-Sep-08 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. By the impugned order dated 26.12.2002 contained in Annexure-1 the appointment of the petitioner has been declared to be illegal and has been accordingly cancelled after giving an opportunity of show-cause. On facts there is no difficulty in holding that re-entry of the petitioner in the year 1989 on the basis of having worked as a temporary hand for a few months in the year 1983 was without any advertisement and clearly a backdoor entry without compliance with Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In such circumstances, the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Prashant Kumar Sharma 2003 (2) PLJR 27 clearly forbids grant of any relief to the petitioner in exercise of writ jurisdiction. That judgment was taken to the Apex Court but Civil Appeal No.5682-5684 of 2004 was dismissed on 11.7.2006 on the basis of a Constitution Bench Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Uma Devi (3) and others (2006) 4 SCC 1. This aspect of the matter has 2 been noticed in a recent Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Sheo Shankar, 2008 (3) PLJR 363. On behalf of the petitioner it has been submitted that in paragraph-14, the petitioner has pointed out that a similarly appointed employee Surendra Sharma is continuing in the department and has been promoted to the post of Mapak. There is no reply to that averment. Be that as it may, in view of the law discussed above, the writ application has to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. The concerned Respondents are directed to apply their minds to the case of Surendra Sharma in accordance with law as indicated above without any delay. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)