Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Nandu Prasad vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 6 July, 2015

Author: R. Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  W.P.(S) No. 2492 of 2009
                               ---
    Nandu Prasad son of Late Sukhdeo Singh, resident of Baliguma Bagan
    Area, P.O. and P.S. M.G.M., Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum
    (Jamshedpur)                           ...      ...       Petitioner
                              Versus
    1. State of Jharkhand
    2. The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Nepal House, Doranda,
    P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi
    3. The Chief Engineer, Swarnrekha Multi Purpose Project, Icha Galudih
    Complex, Adityapur, P.O. and P.S. Adityapur, District East
    Singhbhum At Jamshedpur
    4. The Superintending Engineer, Kharkai Bandh Circle, Icha Chaliama,
    Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur
    5. The Executive Engineer, Minor Distributory Division No. II,
    Chandil, Camp Dimna, Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum at
    Jamshedpur                             ...      ...       Respondents
                               ---
CORAM      : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
                              ---
    For the Petitioner        : Mr. Krishna Shankar, Advocate
    For the Respondents       : Mr. Sunil Singh, J. C. to S. C. (Mines)
                              ---
    C.A.V. On 30/04/2015                   Pronounced on .../07/2015

           In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for a direction
     upon the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of
     Junior Selection Grade/Senior Selection Grade and Supertime Scale
     (2.5%) as also the benefits of 1st and 2nd A.C.P.
           2. The petitioner being a matriculate was appointed on the post
     of Officiating Orderly Peon vide Memo No. 93 dated 04.11.1972 in the
     office of Executive Engineer, Advance Planning & Investigation
     Division, Jamshedpur to which the petitioner duly joined. The
     petitioner was promoted to the post of Correspondence Clerk vide
     Letter No. 194 dated 28.01.1986 issued by the Chief Engineer and the
     petitioner has been given seniority in the cadre of Correspondence
     Cleark w.e.f. 01.03.1981. Since the petitioner was not granted Junior
     Selection Grade, Senior Selection Grade and Supertime Scale, the
     petitioner represented the authorities by bringing to their notice the
     aforesaid fact but inspite of the recommendation made by the
     respondent nos. 4 and 5 no decision was taken by the respondent no. 3.
     The petitioner has already superannuated from service on 31.05.2009
     and, therefore, the petitioner by way of this writ application has
     prayed for grant of the Selection Grades and 1st and 2nd A.C.P.
                              -2-


      3. Heard Mr. Krishna Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Mr. Sunil Singh, learned J. C. to S. C. (Mines).
      4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that as per the Circular issued by the Department of Personnel &
Administrative Reforms the minimum period prescribed for grant of
Junior Selection Grade is five years, from Junior Selection Grade to
Senior Selection Grade five years and to Supertime Scale the minimum
period required is three years. However, inspite of the petitioner
having fulfilled the requisite criteria but only because of the fact that
the petitioner did not pass the Accounts examination the Departmental
Establishment Committee did not consider the claim of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner
is also entitled for the benefits of 1st and 2nd A.C.P. on completion of
12 years and 24 years of service on 01.03.1993 and 01.03.2005
respectively.
      5. Mr. Sunil Singh, leaned J.C. to S.C. (Mines) has submitted that
the petitioner was denied the benefits of the Selection Grade and the
1st and 2nd A.C.Ps. on the ground that till the date of his
superannuation the petitioner did not pass the Accounts examination.
It has further been submitted that the request of the petitioner for
exemption from passing the Accounts examination was rejected by the
Commissioner, Kolhan, Chaibasa. It has also been submitted that in
terms of the Rule 157 (3)(J) of the Bihar Board Miscellaneous Rule 1958
it was incumbent upon the petitioner to pass the Accounts examination
to be promoted to the Selection Grade but having not done so the
authorities have rightly not granted Selection Grades to the petitioner
in terms of the said Rule.
      6. The provision of 157 (3)(J) of the Bihar Board Miscellaneous
Rule was under consideration by the Full Bench of the Patna High
Court and relevant for the purpose of this present application are
Paragraph 13, 14 and 15 which are quoted hereinbelow:-
             13. On the basis of the above discussion have no
            hesitation in holding that the State Government was
            fully competent to amend rule 157 (3) (J) of the
            Boards Miscellaneous Rules by executive instructions
            and the amendment made vide correction slip no. 30
                                  -3-

            dated 29.3.82 was a valid amendment. Thus, clerks
            were required to pass the final examination in
            Accounts as a condition for promotion to the selection
            grades after 29.3.82.
             14. The above discussion, however, covers the period
            between 29.3.82 and 29.4.85. So far as the period
            between 1.5.80 and 29.3.82 is concerned, I am
            inclined to agree with the petitioners that after
            amalgamation of the posts of L.D. And U.C. Clerks,
            in the absence of any provision requiring the clerks to
            pass Accounts examination for promotion to selection
            grade, and the erstwhile provision having become
            redundant or otiose. The promotion could not be
            denied to them on account of non-passing of the
            Accounts examination during that period. The
            amendment dated 29.3.82 was result of
            administrative instruction and could not have nay
            retrospective effect. To that extent, I would also
            endorse the decision of this Court in Shamsuddins
            case.
             15. As regards the period from 29.4.85; counsel for
            the petitioners fairly agreed that the amendment
            having been brought under article 309 of the
            Constitution, the statutory nature of which cannot be
            doubted, the clerks could not be promoted to the
            selection grade posts without passing the Accounts
            examination. In view of the fair stand of the counsel
            for the petitioners it is not necessary to discuss the
            case with respect to the period from 29.4.85 onwards."

      7. The petitioner was initially appointed vide Memo No. 93
dated 04.11.1972. The respondents never passed any order on the
representation submitted by the petitioner although the petitioner had
submitted alongwith the representation the copy of the order dated
28.01.1992

passed in C.W.J.C. No. 42 of 1999(R) and 1412 of 1995 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1824 of 1995 (R ).

8. In the counter affidavit respondents have merely stated that since the petitioner had not passed the Accounts examination he was not granted the benefits of Selection Grades as well as the benefits under the A.C.P. Scheme. However, since the respondents-authorities have not considered the claim of the petitioner in its proper perspective and in terms of the order passed by the Full Bench of the Patna High Court reported in 2000 (4) PLJR 262 as well as the order referred above, it would be necessary that at the first instance the appropriate authority applies its mind and, thereafter, pass necessary orders.

-4-

9. Accordingly, this writ application is disposed of directing the respondent no. 3 to consider the claim of the petitioner of Junior Selection Grade, Senior Selection Grade, Supertime Scale and 1st and 2nd A.C.Ps. in view of the judgments noticed above by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

10. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.

11. Pending I.A.'s, if any, is stands disposed of.

(R. Mukhopadhyay, J.) Umesh/-