Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) THE aforesaid Letters Patent Appeal has been filed questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment/order dated 8 -1 -2013 passed in W.P. (S) No. 3566 of 2003 wherein the learned single Judge has been pleased to allow the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner -respondent herein (hereinafter referred to as the 'writ petitioner'). The facts, as delineated and described in the writ application, in a nutshell, are that: "The writ petitioner was appointed in the year 1973 against vacant and sanctioned post of 'Mistry' in the work charged establishment in the district of Chatra. Subsequently, the writ petitioner has been promoted to the post of Pipe -Line Inspector in the year 1981. In the year 1987, the writ petitioner has been temporarily promoted to the post of Correspondence Clerk vide order as contained in Office Order No. 82 dated 15 -7 -1987 and has also been granted pay -scale of Correspondence Clerk. Thereafter, the writ petitioner was given extension on the above post with pay -scale from time to time by different orders and finally vide Order No. 75 dated 20 -6 -1989, the writ petitioner's promotion was extended till further orders. Accordingly, the respondents/appellants utilised the services of the writ petitioner as Correspondence Clerk and also the salaries of that post used to be granted with all increments and revisions. A gradation list of Correspondence Clerk working in Hazaribagh Circle has been prepared by the respondent/appellant No. 4 and circulated vide Memo No. 372 dated 19 -4 -1990, in which, the writ petitioner's name appeared at serial No. 28. According to the writ petitioner, persons whose name appears from serial Nos. 31 to 37 in the said gradation list are junior to him and they have been promoted to the post of Correspondence Clerk in regular establishment, while he has been discriminated. Again in the year 1995, a tentative gradation list has been prepared and objections were invited by the persons concerned vide Memo No. 110 dated 11 -5 -1995, accordingly, the writ petitioner filed his objection regarding his inclusion of name in the cadre of Pipe Line Inspector. Again a gradation list was prepared and circulated vide Memo No. 293 dated 20 -6 -2001, in which the writ petitioner has been kept in the cadre of Correspondence Clerk. But suddenly, to the utter surprise and consternation of the writ petitioner, impugned memo No. 195 dated 5 -3 -2003 was issued giving direction for removal of the writ petitioner from the cadre of Correspondence Clerk and for recovery of excess amount, without issuing any show -cause or seeking any explanation from the writ petitioner. The petitioner filed representation before the respondent/appellant No. 4 dated 17 -1 -2003 for quashing the impugned order, which was rejected vide letter dated 18 -6 -2003."
(2.) IN the aforesaid backdrop, the writ petitioner filed the writ petition, being W.P. (S) No. 3566 of 2003, praying therein for quashing the order as contained in memo No. 195 dated 5 -3 -2003 under the signature of appellant No. 4 as also the order as contained in memo No. 548 dated 18 -6 -2003 issued under the signature of appellant No. 3, whereby temporary promotion given to the writ petitioner in the year 1987 has been withdrawn and direction has been issued for recovery of excess payment; and also for declaration that temporary promotion given to the writ petitioner vide Office Order No. 82 dated 15 -7 -1987 and continued till date by subsequent orders of extension has become regular due to long continuance in the said post for about 17 years, which was allowed by order/judgment dated 8 -1 -2013 by the learned single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 3566 of 2003. Being aggrieved by the order dated 8 -1 -2013 passed in W.P. (S) No. 3566 of 2003 passed by the learned single Judge, the appellants -State has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel appearing for the appellants -State and perused the record.;