- (1.) The three appellants were the writ petitioners to the writ petition which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. They had approached this Court for their regularization and for setting aside the order by which their earlier regularization in the service of the State Government had been set aside upon review. Today, a counter affidavit has been filed which is on record. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the State and with their consent, this appeal is being disposed of at this stage itself.
(2.) The facts of this case are not in dispute. The three writ petitioners/appellants were recruited at different times on daily wages as "Khalasi" in the Central Design Organization, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar. They worked in between 01.01.1985 to April, 1988, in all, for a period in excess of 240 days. They had approached this Court earlier for their regularization, which writ petition was disposed of in the year 2004 with a direction to the authorities to consider their cases and take appropriate action. Accordingly, they were regularized vide office order dated 22.12.2006, which office order was issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government in the Road Construction Department, which was Annexure-6 to the writ petition. Their regularization was short lived inasmuch as on 23.03.2011, they were issued with a show cause to show as to why their regularization be not withdrawn and/or cancelled, being contrary to the resolution No. 639 dated 16.03.2006 of the Government and, upon receipt of the cause shown, by the impugned order dated 02.01.2013 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition), their regularization order issued earlier on 22.12.2006 was cancelled. This is what brought them to this Court.
(3.) The learned Single Judge noted that combining the period of work from 01.01.1985 to April, 1988, the writ petitioners had worked for 240 days. They had not worked for 240 days per year in last five (5) years, which, as per the learned Single Judge, was the requirement of the resolution for regularization taken on 16.03.2006. That being so, the learned Single Judge held that the writ petitioners/appellants were irregularly and illegally regularized. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.;