IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17826 of 2009 PANKAJ KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE MALA CHAUDHUR R/O VILL.- MARIPUR, POST & P.S.- PHULWARIA, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE SECRETARY, AT PRESENT KNOWN AS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, OLD SECRETARIAT, BIHAR, PATNA 3. DEPUTY SECRETARY PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM DEPARTMENT, OLD SECRETARIAT, BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE FINANCE COMMISSIONER, AT PRESENT KNOWN AS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE AGRICULTURE PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER, AT PRESENT KNOWN AS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, NEW SECRETARIAT, BIHAR, PATNA 6. THE SPECIAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, NEW SECRETARIAT, BIHAR, PATNA 7. THE ADMINISTRATOR BIHAR STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD (ABOLISHED), PANT BHAWAN, BAILY ROAD, PATNA with CWJC No.17973 of 2009 ASHOK KUMAR SINGH S/O SRI SARYUG PRASAD SINGH R/O MOHALLA- AHIYAPUR ZERO MILES, IN FRONT OF BAZAR SAMITI MAIN GATE, P.S.- AHIYAPUR, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE AGRICULTURE PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE SECRETARY PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE THREE MEMBER GROUP OF SECRETARIES OF FINANCE COMMISSIONER AGRICULTURE PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT 6. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 7. THE ADMINISTRATOR BIHAR STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD (DISSOLVED), PANT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA ----------- 04. 25.01.2010 Counsel for the Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board(dissolved) (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”) has filed counter affidavit in the two writ application, the counsel for petitioner Pankaj Kumar Singh has filed rejoinder. Both the counter and rejoinder affidavit is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the Board. 3. Petitioners in the two writ application were appointed in the Board on the post of Assistant Engineer and Junior Engineer. After dissolution of the Board their services have been dispensed with under order dated 9.10.2009, Annexure-19 in C.W.J.C. No.17826 of 2009 - 2 - and under order dated 29.7.2009 Annexure-1 in C.W.J.C. No.17973 of 2009. Petitioners have challenged the aforesaid two orders on the ground that irregularities made while appointing the two petitioners in the Board at the initial stage cannot be looked into while considering their case for absorption in the State Government in the light of the provisions contained in the Bihar Agriculture Produce Market(Repeal) Act, 2006(hereinafter referred to as the “Repeal Act”) as according to learned counsel the illegalities made at the time of initial appointment cannot be looked into by the authorities while considering the case for absorption in view of the provisions contained in the Act and such view has been taken by the Division Bench of this Court under orders dated 9.12.2009 passed in the case of Mahesh Prasad Singh Versus The State of Bihar & Others in C.W.J.C. No.7346 of 2009 and in the case of Dinesh Prasad Singh and Anr. Versus The State of Bihar & Ors. in C.W.J.C. No.7365 of 2009, Annexure-21 in the two writ application. 4. Counsel for the Board has opposed the prayer made in the two writ application with reference to the averments made in the counter affidavit as according to him the illegalities made in the appointment process of the two petitioner is in the nature of violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and such illegalities can always be looked into even at the time of their absorption in terms of the provisions contained in the Repeal Act. Aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the Board has been taken care of by the Division Bench of this Court under orders dated 9.12.2009 and - 3 - this Court with reference to the provisions contained in Section-6 of the Repeal Act has observed that the illegalities, if any committed at the time of initial appointment of the employees of the Board cannot be looked into by the State Government at the time of their absorption in terms of the provisions contained in the Repeal Act. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties, I am of the view that this Court is bound by the observations/directions of the Division Bench contained in order dated 9.12.2009 and in the light of the observations/directions of the Division Bench of this Court, I set aside the impugned order dated 9.10.2009, Annexure-19 in C.W.J.C. No.17826 of 2009 and order dated 29.7.2009 Annexure-1 in C.W.J.C. No.17973 of 2009 with further direction to the authorities of the State Government to reinstate/ absorb the two petitioner with all consequential benefits and pay them arrears of due salary not only from the date of order but also for the period prior thereto, if any salary is found due to them within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 6. The two writ applications are, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)