Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Kameshwar Prasad Singh vs The State Of Bihar And Ors. Through The ... on 7 July, 2017
Bench: A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.6 SECTION XVI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 21436/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 11-02-2015
in LPA No. 1077/2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Patna)
KAMESHWAR PRASAD SINGH & OTHERS Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS Respondent(s)
Date : 07-07-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vijay Hansaria, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Rudreshwar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Gautam Singh, Adv.
Ms. Isha Singh, Adv.
Ms. Snehil Sonam, Adv.
Mr. Samir Ali Khan, AOR
Ms. Nidhi, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Insofar as the claim of the petitioner for grant of first ACP is concerned, we find that the High Court has rightly rejected the same as, in the meantime, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer from the post Signature Not Verified of Junior Engineer.
Digitally signed byNIDHI AHUJA Date: 2017.07.12
At the same time, we find that the High 18:16:53 IST Reason:
Court has, in the impugned order, noted the anomaly which has arisen in view of the position in which the petitioner is 1 SLP (C)No. 21436/2015 placed and is pointed out in the following manner:
“So far financial progression is concerned, this financial progression is personal promotion and therefore, the anomaly now is that though the writ petitioner is senior to the direct recruit he is in the pay scale of the Executive Engineer, whereas, his juniors who were direct recruits to the post of Assistant Engineer are now in the pay scale of the Superintending Engineer.
Normally, these are met by stepping up of the pay scale to protect the seniors but that in our view could be a matter for the State to consider it at the first instance.
It would be for the State to examine whether in fact such anomaly has arisen and if it has arisen then the State would have to immediately take steps to remove this anomaly and under no circumstances apart from the circumstances where the senior suffers a disqualification can the senior receive or be in a pay scale lower than his juniors.” Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to point out as to whether the respondent has taken any steps in removing the said anomaly.
Thus, while dismissing this special leave petition, we direct the respondent to take steps as per the direction of the High Court within a period of two months, if not already taken.
(NIDHI AHUJA) (MALA KUMARI SHARMA)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
2