The State of Bihar and Others vs Bhola Singh

This is hardly any occasion to the Court to interfere with the order on the writ petition by which the denial of regularisation of service was set aside and quashed.

The only defence in the counter affidavit of the State Respondents is that the writ Petitioner''s appointment was irregular and he was at best appointed as a daily wager and he could not be regularised. Whoever made the irregular appointment must face departmental action and take responsibility whether it is the Conservator of Forest or the Chief Conservator of Forest. This matter cannot be made a litigation for the High Court of the errors occasioned by the State Respondents.

The responsibility lies entirely on the State Respondents, notwithstanding they may have inducted the Petitioner into service. Unless superior officers are visited with penal consequences administratively, such issues cannot be left to the High Court to sort out the dirt within the administration of the games played in recruitments and appointments. This is administrative mess which the State Government would be well advised to reserve it for sorting out at the Bihar Administrative Services Tribunal. This'' Tribunal has been rendered defunct by the State Government itself.

Dismissed.