IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4282 of 2004 RAGHUNATH MARANDI & ANR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3. 07.07.2008 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the State. The petitioners have been terminated by two separate orders dated 23.10.2003 from a Class IV post. Though the orders state that their appointment was of a temporary nature extended from time to time when the initial appointment was not in consonance with law, learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners were entitled to be considered for appointment as wards of those who donated lands for establishment of project school. The submission is that a decision to that effect had been taken by the State Government. He relies on a Division Bench judgement of this Court reported in 2004(3) PLJR 553 more particularly para 6 of the same. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. This Court considers it proper to quote Para 6 of the judgement in the case of Sudarshan Ram Hajam @ Sudarshan Ram Vs The State of Bihar & ors, as under:- “6. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that this aspect of the matter has not been considered by the Director, Secondary Education specially in view of the admitted fact that the petitioner has donated 36 Decimals of land to the school in question.” The writ application is, therefore, disposed with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with the observations made by the Division Bench as aforesaid in accordance with law within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. It is clarified that the order of termination shall not prohibit the respondents from considering the case of the petitioners afresh in the light of discussions contained in the present order. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)