Rakesh RanjanversusThe State of Bihar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11185 of 2025
     ======================================================
     Rakesh Ranjan S/o Ramprit Chourasia, R/o Vill- Dhane Goraul, Post and P.S-
     Goraul, Dist- Vaishali, presently residing at Chhoti Marai, Ward No. 28, Post-
     Hajipur, P.S- Hajipur Town, Dist- Vaishali.
                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                         Versus

1.   The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2.   The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3.   The Additional Chief Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of
     Bihar, Vishveshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
4.   The Additional Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, Govt.
     of Bihar, Patna.
5.   The Secretary, Road Construction Department,                 Govt.   of    Bihar,
     Vishveshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
6.   The Deputy Secretary (Management Cell), Road Construction Department,
     Govt. of Bihar, Vishveshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
7.   The Under Secretary (Management Cell), Road Construction Department,
     Govt. of Bihar, Vishveshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s   :       Mr.Siyaram Pandey, Advocate
     For the Respondent/s   :       Mr. Mujatbuddin Haque, GP-12
                                    Mr. Pranoy Kumar, AC to GP-12
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                 ORAL JUDGMENT
      Date : 13-03-2026
                Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and

      learned counsel appearing for the State.

                    2. The present writ petition has been filed for

      quashing the Order No. 1/Misc-55-2017 contained in Memo No.

      1/Misc-55-2017-3627(S) dated 08.05.2025 issued by the Under
Patna High Court CWJC No.11185 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
                                           2/10




         Secretary (Management Cell), Road Construction Department,

         Government of Bihar, Patna (Annexure-P/6 to the writ petition),

         whereby the services of the petitioner have been terminated. The

         petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a direction to the

         respondents to appoint/reinstate him on the post of Legal

         Expert, whose selection and appointment were made in light of

         Notification No. 1/Misc-55-2017-1697(S) dated 28.02.2020

         issued by the Deputy Secretary (Management Cell), Road

         Construction       Department,        Government      of     Bihar,   Patna

         (Annexure-P/4 to the writ petition).

                     3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

         petitioner was appointed on the post of Legal Expert on

         09.03.2020       under      the    Road       Construction    Department,

         Government of Bihar, in light of Sankalp No. 2401 dated

         18.07.2007 issued by the General Administration Department,

         Government of Bihar, and in compliance with departmental

         Notification No. 7946(S) dated 11.10.2019, on contractual basis

         for a period of one year. The said contractual period was

         extended from time to time against a duly sanctioned and vacant

         post.

                     4. Learned counsel further submits that two posts of

         Legal Expert were sanctioned by the department, which is
Patna High Court CWJC No.11185 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
                                           3/10




         evident from Memo No. 7946(S) dated 11.10.2018 issued by the

         Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

         Thereafter, the department published an advertisement for

         selection and appointment on the post of Legal Expert on full-

         time contractual basis by following the reservation policy and

         due process of law. The petitioner applied for the said post and

         his name was shortlisted for interview. Subsequently, the

         petitioner was finally selected under the reserved category and

         an appointment letter was issued in his favour by the Deputy

         Secretary (Management Cell), Road Construction Department,

         Government of Bihar, Patna vide Memo No. 1697(S) dated

         28.02.2020. After such appointment, the petitioner joined and

         continued to discharge his duties diligently.

                     5.    Learned      counsel        further   submits   that   the

         department issued a letter bearing Memo No. 3627(S) dated

         08.05.2025 whereby the contractual extension granted to the

         petitioner was rescinded with immediate effect without any

         prior notice or opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Being

         aggrieved by the said action, the petitioner submitted

         representations dated 09.05.2025 before the Additional Chief

         Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of

         Bihar, Patna, and thereafter on 04.06.2025 before the Chief
Patna High Court CWJC No.11185 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
                                           4/10




         Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna in light of Memo No.

         1003 dated 22.01.2021 issued by the General Administration

         Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, which provides for an

         appellate remedy. However, till date no decision has been taken

         on the said representations. Learned counsel for the petitioner

         further submits that the petitioner was appointed following due

         process of law and had been discharging his duties for about

         five years. It is further submitted that although the appointment

         was contractual in nature, the respondent authorities are now

         intending to appoint another person on the same post by issuing

         a fresh advertisement on contractual basis, which is contrary to

         the settled principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme

         Court.

                     6. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the

         petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme

         Court in Manish Gupta and Another vs. President, Jan

         Bhagidari Samiti and Others in Civil Appeal Nos. 3084-3088 of

         2022, wherein in paragraph-12 it has been observed that: “It is

         a settled principle of law that an ad hoc employee cannot be

         replaced by another ad hoc employee and he can be replaced

         only by another candidate who is regularly appointed by

         following the prescribed regular procedure.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.11185 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
                                           5/10




                     7. Learned counsel further submits that by way of

         supplementary affidavit the joining letter of the petitioner has

         been brought on record, which also contains the terms of the

         contractual agreement. Clause-9 of the said agreement

         specifically provides that the contract may be terminated by

         either side by giving one month’s notice or payment of one

         month’s contractual remuneration.

                     8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied

         upon a judgment passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court

         in CWJC No. 19405 of 2024 (Pawan Kumar vs. The State of

         Bihar and Others), wherein the matter relating to appointment

         on the post of Data Entry Operator was disposed of in favour of

         the employee.

                     9. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,

         submits that the impugned letter (Annexure-P/6), by which the

         contractual engagement of the petitioner as Legal Expert ended.

         The said letter has been issued strictly in accordance with law. It

         is submitted that the petitioner was engaged purely on

         contractual basis for a period of one year, which was subject to

         extension from time to time. Learned counsel further submits

         that the appointment letter (Annexure-P/4) clearly stipulates that

         the contractual engagement may be terminated at any time
Patna High Court CWJC No.11185 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
                                           6/10




         without any prior notice, and therefore no illegality has been

         committed by the department.

                     10. Learned counsel further submits that his contract

         was extended in the interest of work, time to time and contract

         has been cancelled after five years. Counsel submits that service

         condition has also been issued vide Memo No. 1697(s) dated

         28.02.2020 which is (Annexure P/4 to the writ petition). In the

         light of the facts and circumstances of the present writ petition,

         the petitioner is not entitled for any relief.

                     11. Upon hearing the parties and on perusal of the

         records, particularly Annexure-P/4 to the writ petition issued

         vide Memo No. 1697(S) dated 28.02.2020, which is most

         relevant for the present controversy, it transpires to this Court

         that the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Legal

         Expert was purely contractual in nature. The initial engagement

         was for a period of one year, which was extendable from time to

         time depending upon the requirement of the department. The

         terms and conditions of the said contract, as contained in the

         appointment letter, are as follows:—

                                              fcgkj ljdkj
                                            iFk fuekZ.k foHkkx
                                                  vkns”k
                                  vf/klqpuk la[;k&1@fofo/k&55@2017
                      foHkkxh; vf/klwpuk la[;k&7946¼,l½ fnukad 11-10-2019 ds }kjk
                 iFk fuekZ.k foHkkx] fcgkj] iVuk esa lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;kstu gsrq
Patna High Court CWJC No.11185 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
                                           7/10




                 02¼nks½ fof/k fo”ks’kK dk in Lohd`r fd;k x;k gSA
                            mDr in ij fu;kstu gsrq Online izkIr vkosnu i= ds vk/kkj
                 ij fu;kstu gsrq lk{kkRdkj lfefr }kjk fy, x, varZoh{kk ,oa es/kk lwph
                 ds vk/kkj ij foHkkxh; fu;qfDr lfefr ds vuq”kalk ds vkyksd esa Jh
                 jkds”k jatu] firk&jke izhr pkSjfl;k] eks0&NksVh ejbZ] okMZ la[;k&24]
                 iksLV&gkthiqj] ftyk&oS”kkyh dks fof/k fo”ks’kK ds fjDr in ij lafonk
                 ds vk/kkj ij ;ksxnku dh frfFk ls ,d o’kZ ds fy, fu;kstu fd;k tkrk
                 gSA
                 2- ;g lafonk fu;kstu vLFkkbZ gS ftls fdlh Hkh le; fcuk lwpuk ds
                 lekIr dh tk ldrk gSA Hkfo’; esa lafonk fu;kstu ds vk/kkj ij LfkkbZ
                 fu;kstu ds fy, fdlh izdkj dk nkok ekU; ugha gksxkA
                 3- lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;ksftr dehZ ljdkjh lsod ugha ekus tk;saxs
                 vkSj ljdkjh lsod dks vuqekU; fdlh Hkh lqfo/kk ds os gdnkj ugha
                 gksaxsA lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;kstu ds ckn ljdkjh lsok esa
                 fu;ferhdj.k dk mudk dksbZ Hkh nkok ugha cusxkA
                 4- lkekU; iz”kklu foHkkx ds ladYi la[;k&2401 fnukad 18-07-2007 esa
                 fufgr izko/kku ds vkyksd esa vfHk;kstu funs”kky; esa vfHk;kstu
                 inkf/kdkjh dk osru ds vk/kkj ij fof/k fo”ks’kK dk ekfld
                 ikfjJfed :0 64]000@& ¼pkSlB gtkj½ fu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gSA blds
                 vfrfjDr fdlh izdkj dk jkf”k ns; ugha gksxkA muds tkfr izek.k i=
                 lacaf/kr ftyk inkf/kdkjh ls lR;kiu ds mijkUr gh ikfjJfed dk
                 Hkqxrku fd;k tk;sxkA
                 5- ;ksxnku ds le; vlSfud “kY; fpfdRld ls LokLF; izek.k&i=
                 layXu djuk gksxkA
                 6- fu;qfDr i= fuxZr gksus dh frfFk ls ,d i{k ds vanj vfuok;Z :i ls
                 ;ksxnku djuk gksxk vU;Fkk lafonk fu;kstu lekIr dj fn;k tk;sxkA
                 7- ekfld ikfjJfed jkf”k dk ogu ekax la0&41 ds LFkkiuk ,oa izfrc)
                 O;; ds v/khu eq[; “kh’kZ 3054&lM+d rFkk lsrq] mi eq[;
                 “kh’kZ&80&lkekU;] y?kq “kh’kZ&001&funs”ku rFkk iz”kklu] mi
                 “kh’kZ&0001&funs”ku] foi= dksM&41&3054800010001] fo’k; “kh’kZ&0001-
                 28-02&lafonk lsok;sa vUrxZr fodyuh; gksxkA
                 8- lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;ksftr dehZ dks NqV~Vh dh vuqekU;rk ugha
                 gksxhA mUgsa ljdkjh lsodksa dks vuqekU; vkdfLed vodk”k ek=
                 vuqekU; gksxkA Ng ekgksa dh vof/k ds lafonk vk/kkfjr fu;kstu ds
                 lanHkZ esa ljdkjh lsodksa dks vuqekU; okf’kZd vkdfLed vodk”kksa dh dh
                 dqy la[;k ds vk/ks dh la[;k esa vkdfLed vodk”k vuqekU; gksxkA
                 9- vuqca/k lekfIr ds iwoZ ;fn iqufuZ;kstu ugha gksrk gS] rks oSlh fLFkfr
                 esa fu/kkZfjr frfFk dks budk vuqca/k Lor% lekIr ekuk tk;sxk vkSj blds
                 fy, vkns”k fuxZr fd;k tkuk visf{kr ugha gksxkA
                 10- ;ksxnku ds fy, ;k=k HkRrk vuqekU; ugha gksxkA
                 11- lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;ksftr fd;s tkusokys dehZ dks layXu fofgr
                 izi= esa ,djkjukek miyC/k djkuk vko”;d gksxkA
Patna High Court CWJC No.11185 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
                                           8/10




                                                                       g0@&
                                                                   ¼ccyw dqekj½
                                                                mi lfpo ¼iz0dks0½

                     12. It transpires to this Court that the document on the

         basis of which the petitioner entered into service is Annexure-

         P/4 to the writ petition. Pursuant to the said appointment, the

         petitioner joined the post and, at the time of joining, an

         agreement was executed between the parties. The terms and

         conditions of the said agreement are as follows:—

                                           ifjf”k’V &1
                                lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;kstu gsrq ,djkjukek
                        ;g ,djkjukek iFk fuekZ.k foHkkx foHkkx] fcgkj ljdkj]
                      iVuk ,oa p;fur@fu;ksftr gksus okys Jh jkds”k jatu ds chp
                      fuEufyf[kr “kRRkksZa ds lkFk dh tk ugha gS%&
                      1- ;g fu;kstu dsoy fof/k fo”ks’kK ¼in dk uke½ ds fy, fd;k
                      tk;sxkA
                      2- ;g fu;kstu lafonk ds vk/kkj ij dsoy 01 ¼,d½ lky ds fy,
                      fd;k tk;sxk ysfdu fo”ks’k ifjfLFkfr esa bldh vof/k vxys 01
                      ¼,d½ lky rd c<+k;h tk ldsxhA
                      3- lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;ksftr Jh jkds”k jatu dks 64000@:0
                      izfrekg ,deq”r jkf”k ikfjJfed ds :i esa ns; gksxk ,oa blds
                      vfrfjDr vU; dksbZ jkf”k ;k HkRrk ns; ugha gksxkA
                      4- bl rjg ds fu;ksftr O;fDr dks bl fu;kstu ds vk/kkj ij
                      ljdkjh lsodksa dks ns; dksbZ vU; lqfo/kk vuqekU; ugha gksxhA
                      5- bl vk/kkj ij Hkfo’; esa fu;fer fu;qfDr vFkok vU;Fkk dksbZ
                      nkok vuqekU; ugha gksxkA
                      6- lafonk ij fu;ksftr O;fDr dh lsok LFkkukUrj.kuh; ugha gksxhA
                      7- lafonk ij fu;kstu ds mijkar fu;ksftr LFkku gsrq vius
                      bPNkuqlkj vkosnd nks fodYi ns ldrs gSa ijUrq fdlh Hkh Lfkku ij
                      fu;kstu dk vf/kdkj foHkkx ds ikl lqjf{kr jgsxkA
Patna High Court CWJC No.11185 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
                                           9/10




                      8- bl izdkj dk fu;kstu lafonk vof/k ¼daVªsDV ihfj;M½ lekfIr
                      ds iwoZ mHk; i{kksa }kjk ,d ekg dh iwoZ lwpuk nsdj ;k ,d ekg
                      dh lafonk jkf”k ,deq”r nsdj lekIr dh tk ldsxhA
                      9- lafonk ij fu;kstu ds i”pkr~ nksuksa i{kksa dks ,djkjukek dh
                      mijksDr “krsZa ekU; gksxhA fu;ksftr O;fDr mijksDr ,djkjukek ds
                      fdlh Hkh “krZ dk mYya?ku djsaxs rks ,djkjukek Lor% lekIr le{kk
                      tk;sxkA
                                                           Rakesh Ranjan
                      iFk fuekZ.k foHkkx] fcgkj] iVuk    fu;ksftr O;fDr 09-03-2020

                       13. Upon perusal of the terms of the advertisement,

         it transpires that the employment of the petitioner was purely

         temporary and contractual in nature and could be terminated at

         any time. However, the appointment agreement contains a

         specific stipulation that termination of the contract by either side

         shall be preceded by one month’s prior notice or payment of one

         month’s contractual remuneration in lieu thereof.

                       14. Since the appointment of the petitioner was

         purely contractual in nature as Legal Expert, this Court is not

         inclined to interfere with the impugned action of the

         respondents. However, one aspect requires consideration,

         namely that prior to termination of the contract, one month’s

         notice was not given to the petitioner as required under the

         terms of the agreement.

                       15. Accordingly, in light of the aforesaid contractual

         stipulation, the State is directed to make payment of one
             Patna High Court CWJC No.11185 of 2025 dt.13-03-2026
                                                       10/10




                      month’s contractual remuneration to the petitioner within a

                      period of 30 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy

                      of this order.

                                     16. So far as the judgments relied upon by learned

                      counsel for the petitioner in Manish Gupta (supra) and Pawan

                      Kumar (supra) are concerned, it appears that in those cases the

                      issue related to replacement of ad hoc employees. In the present

                      case, the petitioner was not an employee holding a regular or ad

                      hoc post but was engaged as a Legal Expert purely on

                      contractual basis. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view

                      that the aforesaid judgments are not applicable to the facts of the

                      present case and do not advance the case of the petitioner.

                                     17. In the result, the writ petition stands dismissed

                      with the aforesaid observation and direction.


                                                  (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          16/03/2026
Transmission Date       NA