IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4503 of 2004 LAKSHMAN MISHRA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4 21-10-2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The impugned order dated 12-1-2004 ( Annexure-4) shows that regularization of Class-IV employees of work charge establishment into Class-III posts in regular cadre has been declared illegal leading to reversion of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that similar writ petition bearing C.W.J.C.No. 3390/04 ( Bageshwari Sharma Vrs. The State of Bihar ) was allowed by a Bench of this court on 31-8- 2005 and it was held that reversion after 21 years of absorption in Class III post was illegal and that judgment was upheld by a Bench of this court in L.P.A.. and S.L.P. was dismissed in Supreme Court. It has been submitted that petitioner’s case for regularization was also decided in his favour long back in the year 1981 and he has been reverted after about 23 years and hence he is also entitled to benefit of judgment dated 31-8-2005 passed in the case of Bageshwari Sharma (supra) . Learned counsel for the State has placed reliance upon a Full Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Durganand Jha Vrs. The State of Bihar (F.B.)( 2007 (4) PLJR 259) in which it has been held that work charge establishment is a separate entity and does not have the status of regular establishment and the regularization of such employees amounts to an original appointment made without - 2 - Naresh following the process of selection and hence they are not entitled to be absorbed in regular service because their initial appointment is in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The Full Bench of this Court has held that the regularization/promotion of employees of work charge establishment on Class-III post in regular establishment would be ab initio void and does not confer any right on the appointees and hence the impugned order reverting them from regular establishment to work charge establishment and cancellation of their regularization cannot be said to be illegal. In view of recent Full Bench judgment noticed above which also refers to Supreme Court judgment in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka Vrs. Uma Devi reported in 2006(4) SCC 1, this Court is unable to grant relief to the petitioner. The writ petition is therefore, dismissed. ( Shiva Kirti Singh,J)