IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9486 of 2006 1. UMA SHANKER SINGH, S/O LATE ANUTHA SINGH, R/O VILLAGE- PARSURAMPUR, P.O.+P.S.-PARSAUNI, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI AT PRESENT POSTED AS PHARMACIST AT PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE-BELSAND, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. 2. RANJU KUMARI, W/O LATE BABBAN SINGH, R/O VILLAGE-SHIVHAR, P.S.-DUMRA, SITAMAHI AT PRESENT POSTED AS MAHILA SWASTHA KARYAKARTA (A.N.M.) AT PRIMARY HEALTH CENTER BELSAND, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. …………………PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. UNDER SECRETARY, HEALTH, BIHAR, PATNA. 5. CIVIL SURGEON-CUM-CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, SITAMARHI. 6. IN-CHARGE MEDICAL OFFICER, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, BELSAND, SITAMARHI. ……………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 7 17.09.2009 Petitioners have filed this writ application for quashing of the orders as contained in Anneuxre-4 series by which orders have been passed for recovery of an amount alleged to have been drawn by them illegally without passing the Hindi Noting and Drafting examination. Learned counsel for the petitioners - 2 - submits that by order of 2005 it was made mandatory to pass Hindi Noting and Drafting examination whereas the petitioners have passed the examination in 2003 itself. He also submits that the passing of Hindi Noting and Drafting examination was mandatory only for Accounts Clerks and Correspondence Clerks. Therefore, the respondents have illegally passed orders for recovery of the amount from the petitioners. He also submits that before passing the said order no show cause notice was given to the petitioners and they were not given any opportunity to satisfy the respondents that they were not covered by the said requirement, made mandatory by the resolutions of the State Government, for Class-III technical employees, namely, Pharmacist and A.N.M. on which post the petitioners are working. Although stand has been taken in the counter affidavit that the petitioners were given show cause notice before issuing the impugned orders, but there is nothing on record to support the same. In the circumstances, it will only be appropriate that the petitioners are given - 3 - opportunity to satisfy the respondents that the impugned Annexures, directing for recovery to be made from their salary, were issued under wrong premises and erroneously as they had passed the examination earlier. Petitioners shall also be at liberty to satisfy the respondents that in view of the nature of their job it was not mandatory requirement for them to pass Hindi Noting and Drafting examination. For this purpose the petitioners shall file representation before respondent no. 5 with all supporting documents and clear statements within one month from today. In case such a representation is filed, the respondent Civil Surgeon shall consider the same and, if necessary, shall given a personal hearing to the petitioners and pass fresh orders in accordance with law within two months thereafter. In case the respondent Civil Surgeon finds that the said orders of recovery were passed against the petitioner mistakenly he shall pass consequential orders for withdrawal of the same and refund of the amount of the petitioners recovered from their salary pursuant to the said orders. Till final decision is taken - 4 - by the Civil Surgeon in the matter as directed above, no further recovery shall be made from the petitioners. The writ application is accordingly disposed of with above observations and directions. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)