Judgment 1. This is not a matter which needs to be kept pending, either pending admission or on admission and thereafter for hearing. 2. The issues are sufficiently reflected in paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit in the writ petition which is reproduced: "That it is stated regarding averments made in Para 10 of the writ petition. The Treasury has been running in shortage of staff right from 1985. The work of Treasury increased unproportionately due to taking over Primary, Middle and Secondary Schools of State and declaring the Headmasters as drawing officer. There had all along been heavy pressure from the Govt. for compilation of Treasury Accounts and its timely submission. This Directorate had all along been kept informed regarding shortage of clerical staff in the Treasury requesting for posting of staff, but no purpose. The petitioner has all along been ready to give his honourary service in the hope of his appointment or payment, if fund allotted. Due to above reasons all the five Treasury Officers viz; 1. Shri Surendra Pd. Sharma, 2. Shri Ramesh Chandra Prabhakar, 3. Shri Rajib Ranjan Sinha, 4. Shri Kedar Prasad and 5. Shri Rama Shankar Singh during their postings right from 1985 till May, 1997 wrote to Dy. Director of Treasury and Accounts, Bihar, Patna giving the said reasons and requested either to appoint the petitioner to the post of 3rd or 4th grade post or to provide allotment of fund for payment at daily wages rate." 3. Learned State counsel, present, was unable to answer the inquiry of the Court whether any work force can march on an empty stomach. The fact that extra hands were required to take care of the pendency of arrears to clear the work of the Treasury is not denied. The Treasury Officer seemed to be raising hands with anxiety for additional work force to clear the work of the Treasury which had piled up. The explanation is being given that the petitioner-appellant had volunteered to work without pay looks good platitude but otherwise it is worthless. The Treasury Officer himself recruits people and desires that he be helped for the clearance of the work which is the work of the government. The Court can hardly certify that those who have worked will not eat. On the contrary, those from whom work has been taken shall be paid. 4. The Treasury Officer himself recruits people and desires that he be helped for the clearance of the work which is the work of the government. The Court can hardly certify that those who have worked will not eat. On the contrary, those from whom work has been taken shall be paid. 4. If the stand of the Treasury Officer or the government is that the petitioner appellant had been recruited illegally then who did so should be dismissed first. 5. Having noted the totality of the circumstances and the explanation of the State as a defence in the counter affidavit which aspect was not taken into account, the Court is of the opinion that the Court examining the writ petition, had committed an error apparent on the face of the record. 6. The order on the writ petition is, thus, set aside and the appeal is allowed with costs throughout, except that part of the order that the matter may now be considered by the respondents in the light of the observations made in this order. This should be done within fifteen days from today.