The services of the appellant as well as similarly situated 12 other clerks were terminated by a companyposite order dated 14.5.1997, The other clerks whose services were terminated filed writ petition before the Patna High Court challenging the order of termination.
However, the High Court dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the earlier writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed and, therefore, the second writ petition for the same relief was number maintainable.
It is also number disputed that the writ petitions filed by similarly situated employees were allowed by the High Court and they were reinstated in the service.
The High Court after numbering the statement made by learned companynsel for the appellant dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant as number pressed.
The appellant thereafter filed letters patent appeal before the division bench of the High Court, but the same was dismissed.
Thereafter, the writ petitions filed by other similarly situated clerks were also allowed by the High Court following a decision rendered in CWJC No.
Under such circumstances, the appellant filed a second writ petition before the High Court giving the entire facts and circumstances under which the earlier writ petition was number pressed.
It is number disputed that services of 13 clerks, including the appellant were terminated by a companyposite order.
The appellant also challenged the companyposite order dated 14.5.1997 terminating his services.
Leave granted The appellant herein was appointed as a clerk in the education department in the State of Bihar.
The said writ petition was numbered as CWJC No.
It is against the same judgment, the appellant has filed this appeal by way of special leave petition.
6183/97.
6183/97.
