Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sunil Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Sunil Kumar and ors. vs State of Bihar and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided Apr 04, 2005
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/122005

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Patna High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
C.W.J.C. No. 2467 of 2001
Subject
;Service

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Law - Confirmation and consequential monetary benefits-Appointment through proper channel in 1979--Still not confirmed at post of clerk-cum-typist--No reasons given--No enquiry proceeded--Clear deprivation of consequential monetary benefits--Authorities still in a fix--Petitioner still allowed to work--Consi...

Key legal issue
;Service

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sunil Kumar and ors.

Advocate S.N. Jha, Adv.

Respondent

State of Bihar and ors.

Advocate JC to SC 8

Court's Analysis

Prior History

Narayan Roy, J.
1. Heard counsel for the parties and considered the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioners have prayed for direction upon the respondent authorities to confirm them on the posts of clerk with effect from the date of their initial appointment and to pay them all consequential monetary benefits.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners after due advertisement were appointed by the Joint Commissioner, Commerci

Excerpt

service law - confirmation and consequential monetary benefits-appointment through proper channel in 1979--still not confirmed at post of clerk-cum-typist--no reasons given--no enquiry proceeded--clear deprivation of consequential monetary benefits--authorities still in a fix--petitioner still allowed to work--considering the circumstances the respondent authorities are directed to consider petitioners for confirmation on post of clerk-cum-typist--within six weeks from order--consequential benefits also to be granted--application disposed of. - .....benefits.5. in the counter affidavit, it is merely stated that ;the matter is being enquired into as to the validity of the appointment of the petitioners and other similarly situated persons.6. from the counter affidavit, it appears that the authorities are still in a fix to take a decision in the matter and at the same time, the petitioners are being allowed to work.7. it is not in dispute that the petitioners are appointees of the year 1979 pursuant to the advertisement on the posts of clerk by the competent authority, i.e. joint commissioner, commercial taxes. had it been a case that initial appointment of the petitioners was found to be not genuine, immediate action could have been taken and they could have been terminated by the earliest possible, but, on the contrary, it appears that the petitioners are continuing on the posts of clerk for about 25 years.8. having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the concerned authorities are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners for their confirmation on the posts of clerk within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and in case they are confirmed on the posts of clerk, they would be paid the consequential monetary benefits forthwith.with the observation/direction aforesaid, this application is disposed of.

Full Judgment

Narayan Roy, J.

1. Heard counsel for the parties and considered the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioners have prayed for direction upon the respondent authorities to confirm them on the posts of clerk with effect from the date of their initial appointment and to pay them all consequential monetary benefits.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners after due advertisement were appointed by the Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, on the posts of clerk-cum-typist in the year 1979. It is further submitted that the petitioners were appointed after obtaining the roster clearance etc. and since then they are continuing on the posts of clerk, but till date they have not been confirmed on the posts of clerk with effect from their initial date of appointment, as they are required to be confirmed within a period of three years from the date of their appointment.

4. It is also contended by Dr. Jha, learned counsel for the petitioners, that no departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioners nor any action was taken and without any rhyme or reason they are not being confirmed, as a result of which they have been deprived of their consequential monetary benefits.

5. In the counter affidavit, it is merely stated that ;the matter is being enquired into as to the validity of the appointment of the petitioners and other similarly situated persons.

6. From the counter affidavit, it appears that the authorities are still in a fix to take a decision in the matter and at the same time, the petitioners are being allowed to work.

7. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are appointees of the year 1979 pursuant to the advertisement on the posts of clerk by the competent authority, i.e. Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes. Had it been a case that initial appointment of the petitioners was found to be not genuine, immediate action could have been taken and they could have been terminated by the earliest possible, but, on the contrary, it appears that the petitioners are continuing on the posts of clerk for about 25 years.

8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the concerned authorities are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners for their confirmation on the posts of clerk within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and in case they are confirmed on the posts of clerk, they would be paid the consequential monetary benefits forthwith.

With the observation/direction aforesaid, this application is disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial