The judgment emphasizes the obligation of quasi-judicial authorities to provide reasoned decisions, highlighting the importance of transparency and fairness in decision-making.

1. Heard Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned senior counsel who appears with Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh for the petitioners and Mr. Krishna Chandra Jha, learned Assisting Counsel to Additional Advocate General No.8 for the State.

2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the orders of termination impugned at Annexure-1 series which are founded on a direction issued by this Court passed in CWJC No.4303 of 2015 as well as the order passed by the District Magistrate, Kaimur in Misc. Case No.45 of 2015-16, copies of which are annexed as Annexure-6 and Annexure-2 respectively to the writ petition. A rather strange sequence of events accompanies the present contest.

3. According to the petitioners, following a local advertisement they were appointed as Health Worker in Sadar Hospital, Bhabhua, district- Kaimur on different dates in the year 2009-10. According to the petitioners, the appointing authority is the Civil Surgeon who is also the Chairman of the District Health Society. The appointments of the petitioners were made against the post of Ward Attendant, Guard, Orderly, Swagtak, Mamta Workers. A Public Interest Litigation was filed by a public spirited person in this Court questioning these appointments arising from CWJC No.8068 of 2011 (Nand Lal Ram Vs. The State of Bihar). The Division Bench in consideration of the nature of controversy gave liberty to the said writ petitioner to approach the District Magistrate –cum- Collector, Kaimur at Bhabhua raising his grievance and it was directed that if such application is filed, the District Magistrate, Kaimur would examine the matter and in case there was any irregularity/illegality in the appointment, then necessary corrective measures be taken within two months thereafter. It is undisputed that no complaint thereafter was filed by the said Nand Lal Ram before the District Magistrate, Kaimur and the petitioners continued on their posts. The operative portion of the judgment runs as follows:

“Considering the nature of the controversy this Court feels that the petitioners should move before the learned Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua at the first instance by raising his grievances and irregularities/illegalities have been committed. If such an application is filed before respondent no.4 within a period of four weeks from today, the said respondent shall be obliged to look into the matter and also look into as to whether there has been any irregularity/illegality in making such appointments. If it is found that allegations made by the petitioner are true, then necessary corrective measures should also be taken within a period of two months thereafter. It goes without saying that since the matter relates to appointments to the said posts which are of public importance and beneficial to the messes at large, efforts should also be made for appointment in accordance with law expeditiously within the shortest possible time after following the prescribed procedure so that public interest does not suffer.

With the aforesaid directions and observations this application stands disposed off.”

4. In an around the year 2011 the petitioners were orally asked not to work which was followed by an order dated 15.6.2012 of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Kaimur at Bhabhua terminating the appointment of one Dharamsheela Devi who was appointed as Mamta Worker. She approached this Court in CWJC No.11954 of 2012 (Dharamsheela Devi vs. The State of Bihar) and a Bench of this Court taking note of the Division Bench opinion in the case of Nand Lal Ram (supra) held as such:

A Division Bench granted liberty to represent individual irregularities and take corrective measures. Misconstruing the order of the Court, the respondents wrongly opined that the Court had carte-blanche directed termination en masse leading to the issuance of the impugned order.

Learned counsel for the State submits from the impugned order that a three man committee had examined the appointments and submitted a