Karamchari Panjiyar vs The State of Bihar and Others

Shiva Kirti Singh, J.—Both these writ petitions have been heard together because they involve common question of fact and law. Petitioner in each of the two writ petitions have challenged identical orders of reversion contained in Annexures-17 and 16 dated 8.8.2005 and 5.8.2005 respectively whereby the authorities of the Minor Irrigation Department, Govt., of Bihar have reverted the petitioners from the post of Junior Engineer to their original post of Work Sarkar and Tube well Operator. There is also a direction for recovery of excess salary etc. from 17.3.1979 when the petitioners were promoted to the higher post of Junior Engineer by the erstwhile Bihar Water Development Corporation.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that after a lapse of 25 years or more it was not open to the authorities to question the promotion given to the petitioners by the Corporation specially when the Corporation has been wound up in 1986 and the employees of the Corporation including the petitioners were taken back as Government servants without any condition to the effect that the validity of their promotions will be re-examined. It has further been submitted that in identical and similar matters writ petitions bearing No. 13877/05 (Upendra Kumar Singh vs. State of Bihar) and CWJC No. 12253/2005 (Sushil Kumar Yadav vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) have been allowed by different Benches of this Court vide orders dated 18.1.2006 and 23.11.2005 respectively. Learned counsel for the State fairly submits that similar issues of fact and law have been decided in the aforesaid two judgments in the case of Upendra Kumar Singh and Sushil Kumar Yadav. He tried to persuade this Court to take a different view in the matter and refer the matter to a Division Bench. However on perusal of the two judgments cited on behalf of petitioners, this Court finds no good ground to take a different view in the matter. Hence, these two writ petitions are allowed in terms of judgments and orders passed in the case of Upendra Kumar Singh and Sushil Kumar Yadav and the impugned orders contained in Annexures-17 and 16 respectively are hereby quashed. In the facts of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.