JUDGMENT

CHINNAPPA REDDY, J. —Curious indeed are the ways of the powers that be, in Bihar. The Bihar Public Service Commission published an advertisement inviting applications for the post of a Town Planner in the Government of Bihar. The post was stated to be permanent but the appointment was to be made initially on contract basis for five years. The selected candidate was to be on probation for one year with the benefit of Contributory Provident Fund. Shri L.G. Chaudhari, original appellant in this appeal- he having died during the pendency of the appeal, his legal representatives are now the appellants- was selected and by a notification dated 20th August, 1955, the Government of Bihar appointed him as Town Planner with effect from 5th August, 1955. The order of anointment recited that he would be on probation for a period of one year. Though the post was initially created on a permanent non-pensionable basis and appointment to it was made on contract basis for five years, the Council of Ministers, on 7th August, 1956, considered a proposal to make the post permanent and pensionable and to appoint Shri L.G. Chaudhari to that post on a permanent and pensionable basis, initially on probation for one year. The proposal was approved by the Council of Ministers on 14th August 1956. On 20th August, 1956, the Secretary to the Government L.S.G. Department wrote to the Accountant General informing him that the post of Town Planner had been made permanent and pensionable with effect from 5th August, 1955, the date on which Shri L.G. Chaudhari had joined the post and that Shri Chaudhari was no longer entitled to subscribe to the Contributory Provident Fund. He was to be treated as an ordinary permanent Gazetted Government servant On 28th Sept., 1956, the Accountant General wrote to the Government enquiring as to the date from which Shri Chaudhari was to be treated as a permanent Government servant. On 28th November, 1956, the Under Secretary to the Government addressed a communication to the Accountant General the contents of which are in some controversy. The communication begins with the statement: "I am directed to refer to your letter No. GA4 PH-Eng.- 3803 Dated 28th September, 1956 and to say that Shri L.G. Chaudhari has been appointed on permanent substantive basis with effect from 5th August, 1955, with probation for one year with effect from the date of his appointment." Next follow two sentences which are in controversy. The communication ends with the sentence: "In the circumstances Shri Chaudhari may be treated as a permanent Government servant with effect from 5th August, 1955". The two controversial sentences according to the appellant are "he has been confirmed on his post after the expiry of the period of probation viz. 5th August, 1956 and necessary notification to this effect has been issued. A copy of the same had been sent to you." The two sentences according to the Government are "he is being confirmed on his post after the expiry of the period of probation viz. 5th August, 1956 and necessary notification to this effect is being issued. A copy of the same will be sent toyou in due course". The original letter said to have been written by the Government to the Accountant General was not produced on the ground that it was not available. What was produced by the Government as the draft of the letter containing corrections, the words "has been" occurring twice in the first controversial sentence being scored out and replaced by the words "is being" and the words "has been" in the second controversial sentence being replaced by the words "will be". On the face of it the stand of the Government on the contents of this letter appears to be contradicted by the internal evidence afforded by the alleged draft. In the first place if Shri Chaudhari had not yet been confirmed there was no need for the Government to inform the Accountant General that he was being confirmed and that a notification was being issued. Neither the le