CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, J.:–The petitioner, in the present application, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks quashing of an order, passed by the Managing Director, Bihar Rajya Beej Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as the “Nigam”), dated 29.05.1999, communicated to him by a subsequent letter, dated 08.06.1999, issued by the Regional Manager, Bhagalpur, of the said Nigam. He has also sought for a direction from this Court to the respondents to reinstate him, as Seed Production Assistant, and regularize his service on the said post, with full salary and benefits, attached to the said post.

2. From the order/communication impugned, in the present writ application, it would be evident that the petitioner was working on daily wage basis as Seed Production Assistant under the Nigam at Lakhisarai. Before issuance of the impugned order, discontinuing his engagement as daily wage employee, he was given opportunity of being heard, with the issuance of show-cause notice, which he had availed by filing explanation. His explanation was not found satisfactory by the Managing Director of the Nigam, as he found that his initial engagement, as daily wage employee itself, was illegal, made without following the procedure and in contravention of an order, dated 11.06.1986, issued by the Government of Bihar. It is the case of the petitioner, on the other hand, that he was engaged as a daily wage employee, in the Nigam, after following due procedure by inviting applications through advertisement and adopting the process of selection. His further plea is that after having continued for more than 13 years, the respondents, instead of giving him permanent status under the Nigam, ought not to have disengaged him from his employment on daily wage basis. Various submissions have been advanced on behalf of the petitioner, challenging the order/communication impugned and for the purpose of direction to the respondents to regularize his appointment, which I shall take note of at appropriate stage. To begin with, it would be convenient to consider such pleadings made in the writ application, on the basis of which, it is being claimed that petitioner’s initial engagement on daily wage basis was preceded by an advertisement and due process of selection.

3. The said Nigam is said to be a Government of Bihar undertaking, registered as a Company/Corporation, under Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. The Nigam came out with an advertisement (Annexure-1), inviting applications for appointment against various posts, including 20 posts of Seed Production/Marketing Assistant, in the scale of Rs.880-1510. The minimum qualification, prescribed for the said post, was graduate in Agriculture, preferably with some experience of seed production. The applications were required to be submitted by 28.02.1983. The date of the advertisement has neither been mentioned in the pleadings nor can be deciphered from Annexure-1. The petitioner possessed the qualification of B.Sc. Agriculture and submitted his application, pursuant to the advertisement. It has been pleaded that besides petitioner, 388 applications of Agriculture graduates were received, pursuant to the said advertisement. The petitioner was called for an interview, held on 24.10.1983, whereafter, he was made to appear in a written test, to be held on 15.04.1984. As per the said advertisement, though appointments were to be made on regular basis, the respondents are said to have changed their decision to make regular appointment and instead decided to appoint “232 Agriculture graduates on daily wage basis as Seed Production Assistant/Marketing Assistant”. It is the further case of the petitioner that after the respondents changed their decision to make regular appointment, the Nigam decided to call only such candidates/applicants for interview, who were not working even on temporary basis. By way of clarification, it has been pleaded that such candidates/applicants, who were already in employme

Click Here to Read the rest of this document