IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.886 of 2009 In (CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE 191/2005) 01. The State Of Bihar 02. The Commissioner, Irrigation Department, Bihar, Patna 03. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 04. The Engineer in Chief, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 05. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Samastipur 06. The Superintendent Engineer, Flood Control Circle, Khagari 07. The Executive Engineer, Flood Control Division No.2, Khagaria ….. Respondents/Appellants Versus 01. Ram Pravesh Singh, son of Late Shesh Kumar Singh, Resident of village- Mamrajpur- Yaswant, P.O.- Aroi, P.S.- Sarai, District- Vaishali, at present working the post of Correspondence Clerk in the office of the Executive Engineer, Flood Control Civision No.2, Khagaria 02. Shiv PUjan Singh, Son of Sri Krishna Singh, Resident of village- Murera, P.O.- Hathwa, P.S.- Mirganj (Hathua), District- Gopalganj, at present working on the post of Account Clerk in the office of the Executive Engineer, Flood Control Civision No.2, Khagaria For the Appellants:- Mr. Mayank Rukhaiyar, Advocate For the Respondents:- Mr. Rajendra Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv., Mr. Diwakar Kumar, Mr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, Mr. Navjot Yeshu, Mr. Ramakant Singh, Advocates ---------------------------------- 08. 15.11.2011 The present Appeal is filed against the order dated 19.9.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 191 of 2005. Learned counsel for the State relied upon a judgment of the Full Bench in the case of Durganand Jha & Ors. Versus State of Bihar & 2 Others reported in 2007 (4) P.L.JR. 259, but however such contention has been opposed by the learned counsel for the writ petitioners- respondent herein. The learned Single Judge has also refused to accept such contention as facts of that case would differ in the present case and allowed the writ petition following the orders passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3076 of 1997 and 3144 of 2005 on the ground that in the show cause notice issued to the writ petitioners- respondents herein it was simply stated that their absorption was not in consonance with law and without giving in details the said show cause notice was issued only relying upon certain orders of the Court without any details being shown in the said show cause. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that in a similar matters in L.P.A. No. 1400 of 2010 and in C.W.J.C. No. 4211 of 2004 with I.A. No. 7857 of 2007 in L.P.A. No. 1400 of 2010 a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Hon’ble the Chief Justice and another learned Judge by virtue of order dated 1.10.2010 in the L.P.A. allowed the Appeal and set aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge in which learned counsel for the State has also appeared in the above matter. 3 Under the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that as the facts are same in the present L.P.A, the order passed by the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 1400 of 2010 dated 01.10.2010 can be followed and accordingly following the same the present L.P.A. filed by the State is dismissed. P.K. (T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Vikash Jain, J.)