Letters Patent Appeal No.619 OF 2007 In the Matter of Memorandum of Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent Appeal. 1. Md. Zafar Ali, son of Mohd. Haidar Ali, resident of village- Jedbehara, P.O. Basudeopur, P.S. Kotwali, District-Munger. 2. Ramesh Kumar, son of Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Singh, resident of village-Mekipar, P.O. Mali, P.S. Karpi, District-Jehanabad. ------------------------------ Petitioners -Appellants Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Home(Police), Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director General-cum-Inspector General of Police. Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Headquarter, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Deputy Inspector General, Military Police, East Division, Jamalapur, Munger. 5. The Assistant Inspector General, Military Police, Bihar, Patna. 6. The Commandant, Bihar Military Police, Battalion Begusarai. 7. The Commandant, Bihar Military Police, Battalion-9, Jamalpur, Munger -------------------------- Respondents -Respondents With LPA No.629 of 2007 1. Rajesh Kumar Ravi, son of Shri Rameshwar Das, resident of village+ Agarhan, P.S. Haweli Kharagpur, District-Munger. 2. Mahesh Ram, son of Shri Chunti Ram, resident of village-Tahirpur, P.S. Carkha, District-Saran. 3. Shiv Kumar Ram, son of Shri Jatan Ram, resident of village Akbarpur, P.O. Shitalpur, P.S. Dariapur, District-Saran. 4. Ramu Ram, son of Shri Chandrika Ram, resident of village-Akbarpur, P.O. Shitapur, P.S. Dariapur, District-Saran. ----------------------------- Petitioners - Appellants Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Home (Police), Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director General-cum-Inspector General of Police. Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Headquarter, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Deputy Inspector General, Military Police, East Division, Jamalapur, Munger. 5. The Assistant Inspector General, Military Police, Bihar, Patna. 6. The Commandant, Bihar Military Police, Battalion Begusarai. 7. The Commandant, Bihar Military Police, Battalion-9, Jamalpur, Munger. ----------------------------------- Respondents - Respondent ----------- 2 P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. T. MEENA KUMARI THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA T. Meena Kumari, J. Akhilesh Chandra, J. This L.P.A has been filed against the common order dated 15.05.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants have been appointed by a duly constituted Selection Committee vide Annexure-6, to the writ application, but however, all the appellants were appointed as Trade Rank Constable in Bihar Police Force. It has further been contended that their appointments have been recalled by the Selection Committee. However, the learned Single Judge has not appreciated the fact that there was no violation of any mandatory provision as has been referred with regard to applicability of Rule 663 (d) of Bihar Police Manual which indicates that the Selection Committee headed by the Superintendent of Police as President of the Board. It has also been contended that as the Selection Committee itself is illegal for the reason that D.I.G has headed the said Selection Committee and the order of removal also indicated that the one D.C. Sharma, D.I.G who was in the panel of the Selection Committee had taken bribe. Hence the appointments of the appellants were recalled. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants were subjected to enquiry and submitting the 3 enquiry report behind their back, there services were terminated. Having a serious consideration of the orders, we are of the opinion that the subject of the factum that the said D.I.G., D.C. Sharma who happened to be the D.I.G of East Zone had taken bribe and enquiry report has been issued, but however, the result of such report has not been indicated in the order that the order of termination of appellant has been cancelled. Under the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that the matter can be remitted back to respondent No. 2 Director General of Police, Patna, Bihar to look into the matter with regard to the enquiry report. We also make it clear that if the enquiry report is adverse to the appellants the order of termination stand valid but, if however, if the enquiry report is in favour of the appointments of the appellants herein we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of termination and direct the respondent No. 2 to appoint them and reinstate their services with all consequential benefits. It has been contended by learned counsel for the appellants that in case the enquiry report is against the appellants herein, then the appellants must be provided the content of the enquiry report so that an opportunity must be given to the appellants, herein to reply to the enquiry report in accordance with law. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to furnish the enquiry report in accordance with law in case the inquiry report is against the appellant the matter shall be dealt with in accordance 4 with law. Accordingly, L.P.A. is allowed with the above observations. Patna High Court/ Dated 16th of May, 2011/ Prakash/N.A.F.R (T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Akhilesh Chandra, J.)