LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.603 OF 2005 -------------- Against the order dated 12.5.2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 5996 of 2002. ---------- 1.UMA SHANKAR PRASAD son of Sri BabbanRam, resident of village + Mohalla Sant Nagar, P.O. Barari, P.S. Barari, Dist. Bhagalpur. 2.Girish Chandra Safi son of Sri Jivnath Safi, resident of Belhiyon, P.O. Batra, Dist. Sitamarhi 3.Dularchand Ram son of late Ram jeo Ram, of village Akhorhi, P.O. Ramgarh, Dist. Kaimur 4.Ishwar Sahay Ram son of Sri Ras Bihari Ram, resident of village Amaithi, P.O. Masona, Dist. Rohtas 5.Chandramani Baitha son of Sri Chhathu Baitha, resident of village + P.O. Kewas Nijayat, Dist. Samastipur 6.Ram Padarath Narayan son of Sri Brahmdeo Paswan, resident of village + P.O. Narsanda, Dist. Nalanda. 7.Chhathu Tigga son of late Bishram Tigga, resident of village Arya Beri Toli P.S. Besia, Dist. Gumla 8.Ram Lakhan Mahto son of late Bhaula Mahto of village Chiwtahan, P.O. & P.S. Chiwtahan, Dist. West Champaran 9.Arjun Chaudhary son of late mangal Choudhary resident of village Daniyawan, P.O. Daniyawan, Dist. Patna. 10 RamRatan Ram son of late Achchhe Lal Ram, resident of Tirhula, P.O. Tirhula, P.S. Babu Barhi, Dist. Madhubani. 11.Sri Kant Prasad son of Sri Dudh Nath Prasad resident of village Niranjanpur, P.O. Sakala Bazar, P.S. Kachhana, Dist. Rohtas …… Priave respondents--- Appellants Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR , through the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Water Resources Depaprtment, Govt. of Bihar,Sichai Bhawan, Patna. 2.The Deputu Secretary,Water Resources Depaprtment, Govt. of Bihar, Sichai Bhawan, Patna. 3. Special Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Sichai Bhawan, Patna. …….official respondents- Respondents. -------- For the Appellants: Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, Advocate, Sr. Advocate Mr. Akashdeep Advocate. For the respondents No.1 to 3 Mr. Sanjay Prakash Verma, Assistant Counsel to Government Advocate-5. For the Respondents No. 4 to 10 : Mr. Tuhin Shankar , Advocate. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR.KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA S.K.Katriar, J Heard Mr. Chittaranjan Sinha for the appellants, Mr. Sanjay Prakash Verma, learned Assistant Counsel to Government Advocate No.5 for respondent nos.1,2 and 3, and Mr. Tuhin Shankar for respondent nos. 4 to 10. 2 The private respondents of C.W.J.C. No. 5996 of 2002 have preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna and are aggrieved by the order dated 12.5.2005, whereby the writ petition has been disposed of with the direction to the appropriate authorities “… to invite objections from them and fix their seniority afresh in accordance with law”. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the parties. It relates to the issue of inter-se seniority between the direct recruits and the promotees in the cadre of Assistant Engineer in the Bihar Government. The appellants herein were respondents in the writ proceedings and are promotees who were initially appointed as Junior Engineer. Respondents No. 4 to 10 herein (the writ petitioners) are direct recruits, and were initially appointed as Assistant Engineer. The question of inter-se seniority arose and certain orders were passed by the State Government . Aggrieved by the same, respondent nos. 4 to 10 herein preferred the writ petition. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with the observation that the authorities shall decide afresh the question of inter-se seniority of the two sets of direct recruits and the promotees after inviting objections from them. 3. Aggrieved by this order, the private respondents have preferred this appeal and raise a grievance that it was not a fit case where the learned Single Judge should have remitted the matter to the authorities for a fresh decision because it is tantamount to setting aside their seniority position which had already been settled by the orders of the State Government. It is contended on behalf of the appellants herein that certain observations made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order will prejudice their cases. 4. The present appeal stood dismissed for non-prosecution by order dated 21.5.2007, and it was restored to its original file by order dated 4.7.2008. In the meantime, by its order dated 3.1.2008, the State Government decided the issue remitted by the learned Single Judge . In the facts and circumstances obtaining as on date, it appears to us that the State Government has finally decided the matter 3 B.P. Verma, J by its order dated 3.1.2008, which gives rise to a fresh cause of action to the parties. We are thus of the view that the appeal was neither at the inception, nor at the present stage, is maintainable , mainly for the reason that the learned Single Judge did not decide any aspect of the matter and only remitted the matter to the State Government for consideration and final order. 5. In the result, we dispose of this appeal with the liberty to the aggrieved party to challenge the order dated 3.1.2008, along with the cognate issues in accordance with law. It is made clear that the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order shall not be taken to be conclusive of any issue, except that part of the order whereby the matter was remitted to the State Government for its final decision. (S.K. Katriar, J) I agree. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J ) Patna High Court, The26th August 2010 Rahman/ (NAFR)