IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13593 of 2011 1. Dr.Mukesh Kumar, son of Jaldhar Roy, Radha Dental Care, Vijay Nagar,Bailey Road, Patna-14, present resident of village-Rupaspur, P.O. B.V. College, District-Patna. 2. Dr. Vikas Vaibhav son of Dr. Baijnath Prasad, Dental Foundation, 107, Rajendra Nagar, Road No.4, Patna. 3. Vishal Kumar, son of Vimal Prasad Singh, House No.14, Revenue Colony, P.S. and P.O. Chitra Gupta Nagar, Kankerbagh, Patna.20. 4. Dr. Purushottam Singh, son of Dr. J.P. Singh, at Madhubala Niwas, 489 Dhanauti Main Road, Rajput Nagar, Hajipur, Distt- Vaishali. 5. Kumar Tathagat Singh, son of Kumar Kamlesh, resident of village and P.O. Bihta, District- Patna. ………………. Petitioners Versus 1 The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Health, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Additional Secretary, Department of Health, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. ……………………….. Respondents ---------------------------------- For the petitioners: Mr. S.M.Shabbir Alam, Advocate For the State: Mr. Suresh Kumar, A.C. to G.P.I. --------------- 9. 12.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioners seek quashing of the notification dated 28.7.2011 issued by the Department of Health, Government of Bihar. By the said notification dated 28.7.2011, the services of one Professor, two Readers and eleven Tutors, who had been appointed for a period of one year on 2.8.2010 on contractual basis, have 2 been extended for a further period of eleven months or until the regular appointments are made, whichever is earlier. The main contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that in the notification dated 2.8.2010, by which the said persons had been appointed, it was clearly laid down that the period of contract shall not be extended under any circumstances and in case the regular appointment is not made within one year, then the appointments even on contractual basis shall be made after issuing a fresh advertisement. In support of his stand, learned counsel for the State relies upon a Resolution dated 6.5.2010 issued by the General Administration Department of the State Government in which it is stated that in special circumstances in the interest of work and in the public interest, if there is delay in making regular appointments then the contractual appointments can be extended for a further period of one year. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the notification dated 2.8.2010 being that of the Health Department cannot be over-ridden by the 3 notification issued by another Department. In my view the said submission does not have any force. The notification dated 6.5.2010 is a Government Resolution issued through the General Administration Department, which would have over- riding effect over any Departmental Circulars and Notifications that have been issued, as it is a decision of the State Government and it binds the Department. In view of the aforesaid discussions, there is no merit in the writ application and it is, accordingly, dismissed. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)