N.N.TIWARI, J. - (1.) THESE two appeals have been preferred by the appellants -petitioners against the common judgment passed in their writ applications. The appellants had filed the said writ petitions on a common grievance grounded on the similar facts that they have been working as full time Ayurvedic Medical Officers in the State Ayurvedic Hospitals for more than 10 years, yet their services have not been regularized and they are not getting their salary.
(2.) ACCORDING to the appellants they are Graduates in Ayurvedic Medicines and Surgery from recognized institutions and they were registered by the Ayurvedic and Unani Medicines Board under the provisions of Bihar Development of Ayurvedic and Unani System of Medicine Act, 1951. In the year 1983 vacancies for Ayurvedic and Homeopathic doctors were advertised by the Zila Parishad, Chaibasa in the pay scale of Rs. 730 -1080. The appellants applied for the post of Ayurvedic doctors and were duly selected after facing the interview. The appellants were thereafter appointed in the year 1986. The appellants gave their joining which was duly accepted by the Secretary, Zila Parishad. They were posted as Vaidya (Ayurvedic Medical Officer) at different hospitals. The appellants were paid their salary. In the meanwhile, the State of Bihar decided to take over all the Ayurvedic, Homeopathic and Unani dispensaries run by the Zila Parishad by Memo No. 78, dated 6.2.86. Pursuant to the said decision for taking over, the Secretary, Zila Parishad, Singhbhum requested the District Deshi Chikitsa Officer, Singhbhum by letter No. 586, dated 27.6.86 to take charge of all the taken over dispensaries by 30.6.86 and to pay their salary for the month of June 1986 onwards from the office of the District Deshi Chikitsa Officer, Singhbhum. But the salary of the appellants, who were posted at different dispensaries, were not paid. Thereafter, the appellants filed representations requesting the District Deshi Chikitsa Officer for payment of their salary, who referred the same to the Director, Deshi Chikitsa, Bihar. Several reminders were also sent, but without any result. Similarly situated persons in the meantime preferred writ application being CWJC No. 2182/96 (R) wherein an interim order was passed directing the authorities to pay salary to the petitioners of the said case. The said persons were paid salary by that order, but the appellants were not paid their salary. However, while making payment of salary to the said persons up to October 1997, the State -respondents decided to return their services and also of the appellants to the Zila Parishad, Singhbhum treating them as on deputation. The respondents issued another letter bearing No. 554, dated 15.11.97 whereby the appellants were unilaterally relieved w.e.f 15.11.1997 directing them to join Zila Parishad after making over charge to the compounder of the dispensary. According to the appellants, they have been regularly serving under the State Government for about 12 years since after taking over of the dispensaries by the State and they were not on deputation in the State Government. Other similarly situated persons have been working and are getting their pay regularly while the appellants have been denied the same in spite of regularization of their services. The respondents action is thus wholly discriminatory, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Zila Parshad, Singhbhum (respondent No. 5 in both the writ applications and appeals), in its affidavit has supported the contention of the appellants including their initial appointment and subsequent taking over of the dispensaries by the State Government., It has been stated that since all the dispensaries have been taken over by the Government vide Notification No. 78 De Chi/Est, dated 6.2.86 w.e.f 1.12.85, there is no post for absorption of the services of the appellants under Zila Parishad.
(3.) THE State Government, however, has contested the appellants claim by filing counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 -4. It has been stated, inter atia, that the appellants were not appointed by the Health Department rather they were appointed by Zila Parisad. It has been stated that the dispensaries were taken over by the said authorizes w.e.f 1.12.85 and as such Zila Parishad was not a competent authority for making their appointments. The appellants were appointed in the year 1986 after the date of taking over of the dispensaries. It has been submitted that the payment of salary were made to some other persons in compliance of the direction of this Court and that the respondent No. 4 has directed to return the services of the appellants to the Zila Parishad alter making payment of working period by letter No. 16/V -1 -60/97, dated 20.10.1997 (Annexure -A to the counter affidavit). The payments of salary have been accordingly made from June 1986 to October 1997 and thereafter the services have been returned to the Zila Parishad.;