Nilam Devi vs The State of Bihar

Mr. Rakesh Kumar, J. (Oral)—Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Giri, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to SC-1.

The petitioner, in the present writ petition, has prayed for directing the Respondents to regularise her as Instructor. She claims that the petitioner was engaged as Instructor in the Department of Adult and Non-formal Education of the State of Bihar. It was orally submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Supervisors in the Adult and Non-formal Education Department were also appointed in the similar manner like the instructors and their cases for regularization was allowed. Subsequently, one writ petition filed by the Instructors was allowed in terms of the order passed in cases of Supervisors. He submits that the Judgment of the Single Judge was assailed before the Division Bench and the Division Bench did not interfere with the order of the Single Bench. However, some modification was made. Finally, the dispute has already been set at rest by the Hon''ble Apex Court in S.L.A (C)No.32079/2015. He submits that pursuant to the order of the Hon''ble Supreme Court, a Single Bench of this Court has also passed order and, thereafter, number of writ petitions have been disposed of with observation that the Respondents may consider the case of the petitioners in view of order passed by the Hon''ble Apex Court in S.L.A.(C) no.32079/2015.

Learned AC to SC-1 submits that at least in one case, a Single Bench of this Court had not interfered with the matter and the claim of employees of Non-Formal Instructors/Supervisors was rejected by order dated 27.06.2014 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 2516 of 2014, copy of the same has been brought on record with the counter affidavit.

The Court is of the opinion that once the issue has already been set at rest by the Hon''ble Apex Court, there is no reason to place reliance on the aforesaid order, on which reliance has been placed by the State Counsel.

The present writ petition stands disposed of with observation that the Respondent State may examine the matter in view of order passed by the Hon''ble Apex Court. It is clarified that the present writ petition was filed in the month of January, 2015 and it was pending before this Court.