SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Pat) 1072

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, J.
Madan Lal Yadav - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12665 of 2010
Decided On : 15-09-2014

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rabindra Nath Kanth
For the Respondents: Mr. Sanjay Kumar

Appointment letters not issued by a competent authority are considered null and void ab initio.

Headnote:

Amendment - Challenging a decision by a Committee of three Secretaries - Article 14, Article 16 of the Constitution of India - Summary: The court allowed the amendment in the writ application to challenge the validity of a decision taken by a Committee of three Secretaries. The court emphasized that appointment letters not issued by a competent authority do not constitute a contract between the State and the person and are considered null and void ab initio.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was removed from service and sought to challenge a decision taken by a Committee of three Secretaries. The petitioner claimed to have been appointed under the National Smallpox Eradication Programme and subsequently transferred to different offices.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the application, stating that no relief could be granted to the petitioner despite the plea that similarly circumstanced persons had been reinstated in service. The court directed the Principal Secretary to consider the petitioner's representation and examine the circumstances of those persons who had been reinstated in service.

Issues: Challenge to the validity of a decision by a Committee of three Secretaries, appointment validity, reinstatement of similarly circumstanced persons.

Ratio Decidendi: Appointment letters not issued by a competent authority do not constitute a contract between the State and the person and are considered null and void ab initio. Illegality cannot be perpetuated, but the court directed the Principal Secretary to consider the petitioner's representation.

Final Decision: The application was dismissed, and the Principal Secretary was directed to consider the petitioner's representation within six months.

Order

I.A. No. 6671 of 2014

1. This application has been filed seeking amendment in the writ application for the purpose of challenging a decision taken by a Committee of three Secretaries on 21.05.2014 issued vide Memo No. 8143 dated 17.06.2014.

2. I.A. No. 6671 of 2014 is allowed.

3. The petitioner is permitted to challenge the validity of the said decision dated 21.05.2014 issued vide memo No. 8143 dated 17.06.2014 which has been brought on record as Annexure-22 to the said interlocutory application.

4. From the pleadings of the writ application, it appears that by an order dated 16.12.1992 (Annexure-10), the petitioner was removed from service while he was working as Non-Medical Assistant, District Leprosy Control Unit, Begusarai. According to the petitioner, he has been working under National Smallpox Eradication Programme since 01.06.1978 to 15.03.1979 and by an order of the Additional Director Health Services, Bihar dated 28.03.1987, Civil Surgeons were asked to take necessary action for retrenchment of employees working against Class II and Class IV posts. Since the petitioner was one of the such retrenched employees, vide a letter dated 29.06.1987 issued by Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Madhubani, the petitioner was appointed as Non-Medical Assistant and was posted at Jai Nagar Primary Health Centre, Madhubani where he joined on 03.07.1987.

5. This is his further case that subsequently the petitioner was transferred to the office of Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Begusarai and was paid his salary regularly. On 25.11.1992, the petitioner and other employees were asked to appear before Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Bihar, Patna, alongwith their documents relating to their appointments whereafter, the petitioner appeared before the Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Bihar, Patna alongwith documents. Thereafter, the In-charge District Leprosy Eradication Officer, Begusarai vide a letter dated 16.12.1992 directed that no work should be taken from the petitioner. This is the order which was originally challenged in the writ application.

6. This is to be noted that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 3027 of 1993 which was disposed of by an order dated 21.12.1993 (Annexure-11). It has been stated that thereafter, since no action was taken upon the petitioner’s representation pursuant to the order of this Court dated 21.12.1993, he filed a writ application being C.W.J.C. No. 1285 of 2004 again challenging the order dated 16.12.1992. The said writ application was disposed of by an order of this Court alongwith several other writ applications i.e. C.W.J.C. No. 11056 of 2000 and other analogous cases with a direction to consider the cases of the petitioner’s in the light of Supreme Court judgment in case of State of Karnataka and others Vs. Uma Devi (3) and others (2006) SCC 1. It was in the light of the said order of this Court that a Three Member Committee of the Secretaries was constituted. By a decision, which has been impugned by the petitioner by filing interlocutory application, petitioner’s case has been rejected on the ground that his appointment letter was found to be forged.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner firstly submits that the finding of the Three Member Committee is based on the sole ground that the letter number of the petitioner’s appointment letter does not tally with the Issue Register. He submits that this could not have been the sole basis for rejecting the petitioner’s claim. He secondly submits that several other persons were appointed alongwith the petitioner by the same functionary and they have been ordered to be reinstated in terms of the order of this Court. My attention has been drawn to representation to this effect filed by the petitioner dated 29.04.2014 addressed to Principal Secretary, General Administrative Department, Government of Bihar, referring to specific names who have been reinstated under the orders of t





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top