MOOL CHAND GARG, J.

CM Nos. 21717/2010 and 21718/2010 Delay in filing and refilling is condoned. Applications are allowed and disposed of Review Petition No.528/2010 in WP(C) No.5779/2002

1. Vide judgment dated 06.05.2010 we have dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner, which was originally filed before the High Court of Judicature at Patna under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India but which was transferred to this Court under the orders of Hon?ble Supreme Court dated 08.04.2002.

2. The said writ petition was filed by the petitioner against the decision dated 28-29.06.1996 of the Standing Committee of the Patna High Court recommending „removal? of the petitioner from the services of the Bihar State Superior Judicial service with immediate effect, as also against notification No.11851 dated 02.11.1996 issued by the State of Bihar after accepting the recommendations of the Standing Committee issued under Rule 3(vii) of the Patna High Court Rules 1916 in accordance with the provisions contained under Article 235 of the Constitution of India.

3. The Standing Committee of the Patna High Court, having found the petitioner guilty of various charges for which a full-fledged departmental enquiry was conducted and after the issuance of show cause notice to the petitioner and after taking note of his submissions, took a decision to recommend his removal from service with immediate effect on 28-29.06.1996 and thereafter, the Registrar General communicated this decision to the State Government vide letter dated 02.07.1996 for necessary approval of the Governor of the State. It is not in dispute that on that day i.e. on the day when the decision was taken to remove the petitioner from service, the petitioner was in service.

4. The said recommendation of the Standing Committee was then referred to the Governor of State of Bihar who had been pleased to accept those recommendations and issued notification No. 11851 dated 02.11.1996. We have dismissed the writ petition filed against the aforesaid order of the Standings Committee and the notification No.11851 dated 02.11.1996 vide impugned order dated 06.06.2010. The said order was challenged by the petitioner before the Hon?ble Supreme Court, where the following order has been passed:-

“Counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition due to the fact that one of the issues which was raised before the High Court relating to the alleged cessation of the relationship of masters and servants between the employer and employee even prior to passing of the impugned order of punishment was not dealt with and decided by the High Court and therefore, to obtain a decision on the same a review application is being filed. Review Application on the said issue could be filed before the High Court as it does not appear from the order passed by the High Court that the same was considered and dealt with. If at a later stage the petitioner is to approach this Court, all issues as may be available to him in accordance with law could be raised. Prayer to withdraw this special leave petition is allowed with liberty as prayed for and with the observations made herein.”

5. On the strength of this order, the present petition is filed by the petitioner even though in addition to the aforesaid ground, the petitioner has also urged other grounds but in view of our detailed consideration of the submissions made by the petitioner, we find no reason to interfere or consider the review petition filed by the petitioner except on the ground “of alleged cessation of relationship of master and servant between the employer and the employee even prior to passing of the impugned order of punishment” for which a liberty has been granted by the Hon?ble Supreme Court to the petitioner in the aforesaid order.

6. According to the petitioner, the order of removal of the petitioner having been passed after the superannuation of the petitioner is superfluous and of no eff