It appears under Order Nos. 8, 10 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4517 of 2007 the name of the original writ petitioner has been printed as petitioner though he stood substituted under order dated 25.8.2010. Accordingly, both the orders passed in the said writ case are modified to indicate the name of Baby Devi and others as petitioners.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

3. Original writ petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 4517 of 2007 was appointed as Watchman-cum-Peon in the scale of Rs. 155-190/- under office order bearing memo no.553 dated 23.8.1980 by the Executive Engineer, Planning and Investigation Division, Public Works Department, Patna. Perusal of the said office order indicates that the aforesaid appointment of the original writ petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 4517 of 2007 was in the Work Charge Establishment. After securing the aforesaid appointment original writ petitioner continued to discharge the duties of the Watchman-cum-Peon and in appreciation of the satisfactory service rendered by him his service-book was also opened on 27.3.1987, extract whereof is annexed with the writ petition as Annexure-2. There was also deduction from his salary as contribution towards Provident Fund.

4. Petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 4600 of 2007 was appointed as a Roller Khalasi in the scale of Rs. 155-190/- in Work Charge Establishment under Office Order No. 1910 dated 30.8.1973 issued by the Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Organization, Sahabad Division, Arrah i.e. even before any ban was imposed on such appointment in the Work Charge Establishment under Circular Letter No. 8954 dated 23.7.1975 communicated to all concerned under Memo No. 2893 dated 30.7.1975.

.

5. State Government issued circular bearing Memo No. 3058 dated 22.10.1984 providing for reduction of the length of satisfactory service rendered by the Work Charge Employee in the Work Charge Establishment from ten to five years for regularization in the Regular Establishment. Clause (ka) of the aforesaid circular dated 22.10.1984 provided for conversion of the post of the Work Charge Establishment into Regular Establishment as and when the Work Charge Employee is regularized in the Regular Establishment. Clause (kha) of the said circular provided that only such Work Charge Employees shall be considered for regularization in the Regular Establishment against whom there is neither civil nor criminal proceeding is pending. Clause (ga) of the said circular provided that the amount allocated for payment of salary to the Work Charge Employee shall also be transferred in the appropriate budget head for payment of salary to the regularized worker. Clause (gha) of the said circular reiterated the contents of the Circular Letter No. 8954 dated 23.7.1975 that in future neither any post shall be created in the Work Charge Establishment nor any appointment shall be made against the vacancy created in the Work Charge Establishment with further resolve to ensure strict compliance of circular dated 23.7.1975 and those found violating the same, appropriate action be taken against them. After issue of circular dated 22.10.1984 the Government issued Resolution No. 6394(2) dated 23.10.1987 providing for regularization of the Work Charge Employees recruited after 23.7.1975. 1st Paragraph of the resolution dated 23.10.1987 referred to the contents of circular letter dated 22.10.1984 reducing the length of satisfactory service rendered by the Work Charge Employee for regularization in Regular Establishment from 10 to 5 years as also the fact that there has been complete ban over appointment and creation of post in the Work Charge Establishment under circular dated 23.7.1975. Paragraph-2 of the resolution dated 23.10.1987 accepted the position that notwithstanding the ban imposed on appointment in the Work Charge Establishment under circular dated 23.7.1975 different works department have made appointment in the Work Charge Establishment even after 23.7.1975 and those Work Charge Employ