Anish Kumar & Ors. vs The State Of Bihar & Ors.

Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar Singh, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Jitendra Kumar, learned Advocate for the State.

The petitioners were duly appointed against vacant sanctioned post of Accountant-cum-Storekeepers along with others on contractual basis long back in the year 2012 and they have been discharging their duties after getting proper extension of their services time to time, till date. Once the respondents themselves have recognized the petitioners' appointment as valid by extending their services from time to time, permitting them to continue till the age of 60 years, in the light of the resolution issued by the General Administration Department vide Resolution No. 12534 dated 17.09.2018 as also under Letter No. ICDS/10035/12-2018-3445 dated 09.09.2020 and the revised engagement guidelines dated 22.01.2021. The respondents authorities, in the submission of the petitioners', obliged to frame and implement an effective mechanism for regularization of their services.

It is further contended that in identical fashion, the State Government has extended the benefit of regularization to other identically situated persons, who were working as a contractual driver Constable in the light of the decisions rendered by a Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 13895 of 2021 and affirmed in LPA No. 1123 of 2024. Referring to the mandate of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Jaggo Vs. Union of India (2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826), Vinod Kumar Vs. Union of India (2024) 9 SCC 327, Shripal Vs. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad (2025 SCC OnLine SC 2021) and Bhola Nath Vs. State of Jharkhand (2026 SCC OnLine SC 129, learned Advocate for the petitioners further emphasized that as petitioners' having continuously discharging their duties for several years, in the light of aforenoted pronouncements, their claim of regularization ought to be considered favourably.

On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State submitted that since the petitioners have already approached before the concerned authorities for consideration of their claim for regularization, they shall obviously consider the case of the petitioners' and take appropriate decision.

Having considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that the representations are pending consideration before the Principal Secretary-cum-Secretary, Social Welfare Department along with Director, ICDS, Directorate, Bihar, Patna, the copies of which have been marked as Annexure:- 17 to the writ petition, this Court thinks it fit and proper to dispose off the writ petition with a direction to the respondent no. 3 to consider the claim of the petitioners and dispose of the same in the light of the observations made hereinabove, as also the decisions rendered by the Apex Court, by a reasoned and speaking order preferably within a period of eight weeks, from the date of receipt/production of the copy of this order.

In case, such a representation is filed, the same shall be considered and disposed off by reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of ten weeks.

The writ petition stands disposed off.