Judgment:
R.K. Merathia, J.
1. Heard Mr. Rajiv Nandan Prasad, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. P. Modi, learned G.P.-I appearing for the State.
2. Petitioner had prayed for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 29(11) dated 24.2.1995 issued by the Director-in-Chief, Health Service, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (Annexure 1), by which the earlier order contained in Memo No. ll/T4-23/93-576(II) dated 28.7.1994 issued by Sri G.R. Patverdhan, Secretary-cum-Director-in-Chief, Health Service, Government of Bihar, Patna (Annexure 10) was cancelled.
3. Petitioner's case is that he was working since 10.12.1978 and his service was confirmed by the order of Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Nalanda on 1.4.1982 as contained in Memo No. 3237 dated 2.12.1982 (Annexure 2). Petitioner underwent training pursuant to the advertisement and thereafter, by order as contained in Memo No. 1455/TB/Patna dated 2.11.1985 (Annexure 4), Doctor A.A. Mallick posted him and Ors. at their earlier place of posting in anticipation of order of posting by the competent authority. Thereafter, by order dated 4.3.1986 issued by Sri Fani Bhushan Prasad, Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Bihar, Patna (Annexure 5), he was transferred to District T.B. Centre, Dhanbad. The Vigilance Department found that Dr. A.A. Malick, the then Deputy Director (T.B.) has committed great bungling by making appointment through back door not only in the T.B. Department but through other offices of several Civil Surgeons also. Accordingly, by order as contained in Memo No. 528(11) dated 30.4.1993 (Annexure 9), the services of such persons was terminated. However, by the letter contained in Memo No. 576(11) dated 28.7.1994 (Annexure 10), 22 health visitors including the petitioner were allowed to continue to work but this letter has been cancelled by the impugned order. In substance, the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the case of petitioner is different from the case of the persons, who were illegally appointed by Dr. Mallick. He relied on paragraph 47 of the judgment 1995(2) PLJR 309, Lalan Kumar Singh and Ors. v. The State of Bihar and Ors. affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in judgment reported in : (1997)IILLJ856SC , Ashwani Kumar and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors.
4. He lastly submitted that the Com-missioner-cum-Secretary, Health Medical Education and F.H. Department, Government of Bihar, Patna considered the matter of the persons who are similarly situated with the petitioner and directed to reinstate them by order dated 30.7.1998 (Annexure 27), without any wages for intervening period.
5. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is also similarly situated and thus is entitled to similar relief.
6. Mr. Modi, learned Counsel appearing for the State submitted that the case of Class HI employees only, who were validly appointed by Dr. Mallick and other officers, were considered but the Medical Officer (In-charge), Hussainpur, Nalanda was not authorized to appoint the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner's appointment was void ab initio.
7. In reply, Mr. Prasad referred to Annexure 23, issued by the Civil Surgeon, Nalanda on 12.4.1979 confirming the said appointment.
8. In the circumstances, the matter is remitted back to the Secretary, Department of Health, State of Jharkhand to look into the matter.
9. Petitioner should make a detailed representation before him within six weeks from today, which will be disposed of by a speaking order, after hearing the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation.
10. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case of the petitioner.
11. With these observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. However, there will be no order as to costs.