Chattisgarh High Court
Ram Gopal Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 March, 2022
Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal
Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases
Page 1 of 32
AFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Petition (S) No.4341 of 2020
Order reserved on: 18-2-2022
Order delivered on: 30-3-2022
1. Rajesh Sharma, S/o Shri S.K. Sharma, Aged about 49 years, Lecturer
(L.B.) English, Government Higher Secondary School, Semartal,
Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
2. Toshan Prasad Gupta, S/o Shri B.P. Gupta, Aged about 54 years,
Lecturer (L.B.) English, Government Higher Secondary School,
Dagania Khaira, Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
3. Sobharam Palke, S/o Shri Tilal Ram Palke, Aged about 48 years,
Lecturer (L.B.) Zoology, Government Higher Secondary School,
Majhgaon, Block Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
4. Smt. Anamika Tiwari, W/o Shri Mohan Tiwari, Aged about 46 years,
Lecturer (L.B.) Hindi, Government Higher Secondary School,
Lingiyadih, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
5. Smt. Hemlata Verma, D/o Shri Ram Snehi Kashyap, Aged about 48
years, Lecturer (L.B.) Chemistry, Government Higher Secondary
School, Pandhi, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
6. Anil Kumar Sahu, S/o Shri Ram Kumar Sahu, Aged about 53 years,
Lecturer (L.B.) Maths, Government Higher Secondary Boys School,
Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, School Education
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District
Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal
Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
Writ Petition (S) No.1472 of 2021
1. Ram Gopal Sahu, S/o Shri Shambhu Ram Sahu, Aged about 51
years, Lecturer L.B., posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School,
Pounsara, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
2. Chintaram Kashyap, S/o Shri Firturam Kashyap, Aged about 53 years,
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases
Page 2 of 32
Lecturer L.B., Govt. Higher Secondary School, Loharsi (Son), Masturi,
District Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, School Education
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District
Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal
Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
Writ Petition (S) No.1019 of 2021
1. Chhabilal Divya, S/o Shri Sukdev Divya, aged about 53 years, working
as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School,
Adbhar, Block Malkharouda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
2. Mehendra Nath Sahu, S/o Shri Bhagat Ram Sahu, aged about 56
years, working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher
Secondary School, Chhapora, Block Malkharouda, District Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.)
3. Subhash Singh Paikra, S/o Shri Suklal Singh Paikra, aged about 53
years, working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher
Secondary School, Adbhar, Block Malkharouda, District Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.)
4. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, S/o Shri Ram Gopal Tiwari, aged about 53
years, working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher
Secondary School, Jharna, Block Malkharouda, District Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.)
5. Raj Kumar Madhukar, S/o Shri Achchhe Ram Medhukar, aged about
49 years, working as Lecturer (L.B.), R/o Village Tulsi, P.O. Misda,
Block Malkharouda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
6. Harish Chandra Suman, S/o Shri Jageshwar Suman, aged about 47
years, working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher
Secondary School, Jharna, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of School
Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur,
District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Chhattisgarh, Raipur,
Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases
Page 3 of 32
3. District Education Officer, Janjgir-Champa, District Janjgir-Champa
(C.G.)
---- Respondents
Writ Petition (S) No.5189 of 2020
1. Ramesh Bhargav, S/o Shri Bhagwat Prasad, aged about 50 years,
working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary
School, Bhainso, Block Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
2. Dilip Kumar Jaysawal, S/o Shri Shyam Lal Jaysawal, aged about 47
years, working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher
Secondary School, Shioni, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa
(C.G.)
3. Amrit Lal Sahu, S/o Shri Fikram Sahu, aged about 56 years, working
as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School,
Choria, Block Bamhanidih, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
4. Smt. Rita Pradhan, W/o Shri Gendram Suryavanshi, aged about 50
years, working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher
Secondary School, Porda, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa
(C.G.)
5. Suresh Prasad Sahu, S/o Shri Laharam Sahu, aged about 49 years,
working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary
School, Kosmanda, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
6. Bandhu Swarnkar, S/o Shri Harigopal, aged about 49 years, working
as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School,
Pahariya, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
7. Munna Sungh Kanwar, S/o Sadhu Ram, aged about 51 years, working
as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School,
Pahriya, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
8. Smt. Usha Rathore, W/o Shri Deepak Rathore, aged about 49 years,
working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary
School, Kosmanda, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
9. Smt. Fuleshwari Raj, W/o Shri K.P.S. Raj, aged about 49 years,
working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary
School, Kosmanda, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
10. Chitrasen Singh Bharadwaj, S/o Shri Sundarlal, aged about 52 years,
working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary
School, Salkhan, Block Navagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
11. Smt. Savitri Singh, W/o Shri Raj Singh, aged about 51 years, working
as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School,
Kutighat, Block Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
12. Smt. Abha Despande, W/o Shri Sanjay Despande, aged about 48
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases
Page 4 of 32
years, working as Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher
Secondary School, Kutighat, Block Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa
(C.G.)
13. Prahlad Singh Koram, S/o Shri Ram, aged about 49 years, working as
Lecturer (L.B.) and posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School,
Budgahan, Block Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of School
Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur,
District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction Chhattisgarh, Raipur,
Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Janjgir-Champa, District Janjgir-Champa
(C.G.)
---- Respondents
Writ Petition (S) No.4915 of 2020
1. Ajay Kumar Sinha, S/o Shri Janardan Prasad Sinha, 47 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary
School, Kirodimalnagar, Raigarh, R/o Near Government Higher
Secondary School, Kirodimalnagar, Raigarh, Tahsil Raigarh, District
Raigarh (C.G.)
2. Manoj Kujur, S/o Mikhail Kujur, 51 years, presently posted as Lecturer
(ELB), Government Higher Secondary School, Kodtarai, Tahsil
Raigarh District Raigarh, R/o Rambhata, Sanjay Maidan, Tehsil and
District Raigarh (C.G.)
3. Vijay Kumar Thethavar, S/o Late Shri R.K. Thethavar, 51 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary
School, Kedar, Tehsil Sarangadh, District Raigarh, R/o Near
Government Higher Secondary School Kedar, Tehsil Sarangadh,
District Raigarh (C.G.)
4. Chabhi Lal Chaudhary, S/o Shri Hariram Chaudhary, 54 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary
School, Kanshichunva, Tehsil Raigarh, District Raigarh, R/o
Government Higher Secondary School, Kanshichunva, Tehsil
Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)
5. Smt. Kumudani Chauhan, W/o Shri Anil Kumar Chauhan, Aged about
54 years, presently posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher
Secondary School, Badebhandar, Tehsil and District Raigarh, R/o
Government Higher Secondary School, Badebhandar, Tehsil and
District Raigarh (C.G.)
6. Vidyacharan Banaj, S/o Late Awadhram Banaj, 52 years, presently
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases
Page 5 of 32
posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School,
Kosir, Tehsil Sarangadh, District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher
Secondary School, Kosir, Tehsil Sarangadh, District Raigarh (C.G.)
7. Shyam Kumar Patel, S/o Shri Harihar Prasad Patel, 49 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Girls Higher
Secondary School, Kunjemura, Tehsil Tamnar, District Raigarh, R/o
Shyam Kumar Patel Gare, Tehsil Tamnar, District Raigarh (C.G.)
8. Murlimanohar Dansena, S/o Shri Chaitram Dansena, 50 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary
School, Pusalda, Tehsil Kharisa, District Raigarh, R/o Murlimanohar
Dansena, Village and Post Chhal, Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, District
Raigarh (C.G.)
9. Jageshwar Prasad Rathiya, S/o Mangal Singh Rathiya, 45 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government High School,
Tarekela, Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh, R/o Jageshwar
Prasad Rathiya, Village Chhal, Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(C.G.)
10. Anil Kumar Singh, S/o Shivmurti Singh, 49 years, presently posted as
Lecturer (TLB), Boys Government Higher Secondary School, Kunkuri,
Tehsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur, R/o Boys Government Higher
Secondary School, Kunkuri, Tehsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur (C.G.)
11. Smt. Jayanti Painkra, W/o Shri Prem Kumar Painkra, 53 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary
School, Tumla, Tehsil Pharasabahar, District Jashpur, R/o
Government Higher Secondary School, Tumla, Tehsil Pharasabahar,
District Jashpur (C.G.)
12. Shri Ramnath Ram Nageshri, S/o Bhikhoram Nageshri, 49 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary
School, Kersai, Tehsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur, R/o Government
Higher Secondary School, Kersai, Tehsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur
(C.G.)
13. Smt. Ratrani Akashwani Shardamani Minj, D/o Pyara Tirki, 50 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary
School, Tumla, Tehsil Pharsabahar, District Jashpur, R/o Government
Higher Secondary School, Tumla, Tehsil Pharsabahar, District
Jashpur (C.G.)
14. Lalsai Painkra, S/o Late Shri Durgasaye Painkra, 50 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School,
Khamhar, Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh, R/o Government
Higher Secondary School, Khamhar, Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, District
Raigarh (C.G.)
15. Amarjyoti Prakash Lakra, S/o Late Silas Lakra, 50 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School,
Khamhar, Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh, R/o Government
Higher Secondary School, Khamhar, Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, District
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases
Page 6 of 32
Raigarh (C.G.)
16. Bharat Kumar Gupta, S/o Bandhanidhi Gupta, 52 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary School,
Kodapali, Tehsil Pusore, District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher
Secondary School, Kodapali, Tehsil Pusore, District Raigarh (C.G.)
17. Dhwajaram Chauhan, S/o Duguram Chauhan, 51 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary School,
Badenavapara, Tehsil Sarangadh, District Raigarh, R/o Government
Higher Secondary School, Badenavapara, Tehsil Sarangadh, District
Raigarh (C.G.)
18. Alok Swarnkar, S/o Chabhilal Swarnkar, 51 years, presently posted as
Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School, Taraimal,
Tehsil and District Raigarh, R/o Alok Swarnkar, Boridadar, Tehsil and
District Raigarh (C.G.)
19. Smt. Gayatri Alok Swarnkar, W/o Alok Swarnkar, 49 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (TLB), Girls Government Higher Secondary
School, Kunkuri, Tehsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur, R/o Girls
Government Higher Secondary School, Kunkuri, Tehsil Kunkuri,
District Jashpur (C.G.)
20. J. Sujata Rao, D/o J.P.C. Rao, 50 years, presently posted as Lecturer
(ELB), Government Higher Secondary School, Mahapalli, Tehsil and
District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher Secondary School,
Mahapalli, Tehsil and District Raigarh (C.G.)
21. Shama Parveen Khan, D/o Salim Khan, 50 years, presently posted as
Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School, Sarmani,
Tehsil Kharsia and District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher
Secondary School, Sarmani, Tehsil Kharsia, District Raigarh (C.G.)
22. Smt. Savita Singh, D/o Ramprasad Singh, 51 years, presently posted
as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary School, Tarkela,
Tehsil and District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher Secondary
School, Tarkela, Tehsil and District Raigarh (C.G.)
23. Rajkamal Patel, S/o T.R. Patel, 50 years, presently posted as Lecturer
(TLB), Government Higher Secondary School, Botalda, Tehsil
Kharsia, District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher Secondary School,
Botalda, Tehsil Kharsia, District Raigarh (C.G.)
24. Sevakram Dansena, 51 years, presently posted as Lecturer (TLB),
Government Higher Secondary School, Dhorabhata, Tehsil Tamnar,
District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher Secondary School,
Dhorabhata, Tehsil Tamnar, District Raigarh (C.G.)
25. Smt. Rajkishori Tigga, D/o Bilasius Ekka, 50 years, presently posted
as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School, Tamta,
Tehsil Pathalgaon, District Jashpur, R/o Government Higher
Secondary School, Tamta, Tehsil Pathalgaon, District Jashpur (C.G.)
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases
Page 7 of 32
26. Mohanlal Patel, S/o Shri Jageshwar Patel, 51 years, presently posted
as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School, Tamta,
Tehsil Pathalgaon, District Jashpur, R/o Government Higher
Secondary School, Tamta, Tehsil Pathalgaon, District Jashpur (C.G.)
27. Umesh Kumar, S/o Sarveshwar Prasad, 51 years, presently posted as
Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School, Kothba, Tehsil
Kothba, District Jashpur, R/o Government Higher Secondary School,
Kothba, Tehsil Kothba, District Jashpur (C.G.)
28. Rameshwar Chandra, S/o Chedhilal Chandra, 51 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School,
Sharmani, Tehsil Kharsia, District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher
Secondary School, Sharmani, Tehsil Kharsia, District Raigarh (C.G.)
29. Martha Xalxo, D/o Late Prabhu Charan Xalxo, 51 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Higher Secondary School,
Tamta, Tehsil Pathalgaon, District Jashpur, R/o Government Higher
Secondary School, Tamta, Tehsil Pathalgaon, District Jashpur (C.G.)
30. Bhagwan Das Purain, S/o Mayaram Purain, 50 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary School,
Ulkhar, Teshil Sarangarh, District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher
Secondary School, Ulkhar, Tehsil Sarangarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)
31. Bhuvneshwar, S/o Firatram, 50 years, presently posted as Lecturer
(TLB), Government Higher Secondary School, Bagicha, Tehsil
Bagicha, District Jashpur, R/o Government Higher Secondary School,
Bagicha, Tehsil Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.)
32. Pitambar Prasad Patel, S/o Late Kalash Ram Patel, 50 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary
School, Chhind, Tehsil Sarangarh, District Raigarh, R/o Government
Higher Secondary School, Chhind, Tehsil Sarangarh, District Raigarh
(C.G.)
33. Smt Shanti Bhagat, S/o Prakash Bhagat, 50 years, presently posted
as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary School, Kanakbira,
Tehsil Sarangarh, District Raigarh, R/o Government Higher
Secondary School, Kanakbira, Tehsil Sarangarh, District Raigarh
(C.G.)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of School
Education, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Indravati Bhawan, Atal
Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)
4. District Education Officer, Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases
Page 8 of 32
Writ Petition (S) No.4781 of 2020
1. Ved Prakash Tiwari, S/o Late Shri Vidhyadhar Tiwari, 52 years,
presently posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Girls Higher
Secondary School, Kusmura, R/o Jai Maa Durga Vihar Colony, in front
of Indian School, Tahsil Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)
2. Harishankar Patel, S/o Gautam Prasad Patel, 48 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (TLB), Government Girls Higher Secondary
School, Kunkuri, Tahsil Kunkuri, District Jashpur, R/o Girls School
Campus, Tapkara Road, Kunkuri (C.G.)
3. Choodamani Patel, S/o Late Shri Salikram Patel, 47 years, presently
posted as Lecturer (ELB), Government Higher Secondary School,
Kotarliya, Tehsil and District Raigarh, R/o House No.160, Panchwati
Nagar, Boirdadar, Raigarh (C.G.)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of School
Education, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Indravati Bhawan, Atal
Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)
4. District Education Officer, Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
AND
Writ Petition (S) No.4346 of 2020
1. Santosh Kumar Sharma, S/o Shri Bhikham Chand Sharma, aged
about 50 years, presently posted at Government Higher Secondary
School, Kanki, Block Tilda, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Sanjay Shrivastava, S/o Late Shri Bagishwar Prasad Shrivastava,
aged about 50 years, presently posted at Government Higher
Secondary School, Damakheda, District Baloda-Bazaar (C.G.)
3. Smt. Saroj Yadav, W/o Late Shri Madan Mohan Shrivastava, aged
about 52 years, presently posted at Government High School, Baloda,
Block Dharsiva, District Raipur (C.G.)
4. Ku. Nivedita, W/o Shri Arvind Shukla, aged about 46 years, presently
posted at Government Higher Secondary School, Baloda, Block
Saraypali, District Mahasamund (C.G.)
5. Smt. Yogini Sudhakar, W/o Shri Bhanupratap Shukla, aged about 47
years, presently posted at Government Higher Secondary School,
Choriya, District Balod (C.G.)
---- Petitioners
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases
Page 9 of 32
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, School Education
Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Block 1, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar,
District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Director, Directorate Public Instructions, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar,
District Raipur (C.G.)
3. District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
4. District Education Officer, Baloda Bazaar, District Baloda Bazaar
(C.G.)
5. District Education Officer, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.)
6. District Education Officer, Balod, District Balod (C.G.)
7. Block Education Officer, Tilda, District Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Petitioners in W.P.(S)Nos.4341/2020 and 1472/2021: -
Mr. Anup Majumdar, Advocate.
For Petitioners in W.P.(S)Nos.1019/2021 and 5189/2020: -
Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate.
For Petitioners in W.P.(S)Nos.4915/2020 and 4781/2020: -
Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate.
For Petitioners in W.P.(S)No.4346/2020: -
Mr. Prateek Sharma, Mr. Ravindra Sharma and Mr. Nishant Bhanushali, Advocates.
For Respondents / State: -
Mr. Amrito Das, Additional Advocate General and Ms. Sunita Jain, Govt. Advocate.
For Interveners in W.P.(S)Nos.4341/2020 and 1472/2021: -
Mrs. Prabha Sharma, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate.
For Interveners in W.P.(S)Nos.4341/2020, 1472/2021 and 4346/2020: -
Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal C.A.V. Order
1. Since common question of law and fact is involved in this batch of writ petitions, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. Facts mentioned in W.P.(S)No.1472/2021 are taken, as that writ W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 10 of 32 petition is the lead case and interim order has been granted in that petition.
3. It is the case of the petitioners, as pleaded in W.P.(S)No.1472/2021, that they were appointed on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I vide order dated 10-7-1998 and later-on their services were absorbed by the Department of School Education vide order dated 28-9-2018 in compliance of the policy decision taken by the State Government dated 30-6-2018. It is the further case of the petitioners that they have completed more than five years on the post of Lecturer (Local Body), yet the Department of School Education is denying promotion on the post of Principal on the ground that they have not completed five years of service in the feeder cadre post of Lecturer (LB) by not counting their service rendered prior to their absorption and leaving them aside from the process of promotion. It is also the case of the petitioners that they have been absorbed on 28-9-2018 pursuant to the policy decision dated 30-6-2018 and counting their earlier period of service on the post of Shiksha Karmi rendered in the office of the Zila Panchayat, etc., they are entitled to be promoted on the post of Principal and as such appropriate direction be given to the respondent authorities for consideration of their case for the promotional post of Principal and grant promotion on the post of Principal against the posts meant for promotion through Lecturer (LB) quota as per the Chhattisgarh School Education Services (Educational and Administrative Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2019 (for short, 'the Rules of 2019') and further, the impugned promotion process initiated by respondent No.1 by calling the names of Lecturers, E-cadre exclusively and excluding the names of Lecturers W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 11 of 32 E (LB) may be set aside.
4. Return has been filed by the State/respondents stating inter alia that the petitioners were earlier working as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I in various Zila Panchayats when they were absorbed in the School Education Department as per the policy decision taken by the State Government on 30-6-2018 and accordingly, they have been absorbed with effect from 28/29-9-2018 and their post has been renamed as Lecturer E(LB) cadre, and their services are now governed by the Rules of 2019. As per Rule 14 of the Rules of 2019 i.e. appointment by way of promotion, as provided in Schedule-IV, S.No.9, promotion to the post of Principal requires 5 years teaching experience on the post of Lecturer or Head Master in Middle School and the candidate should be a Trained Post Graduate Teacher. Since the petitioners services were absorbed as per order dated 30-6-2018 with effect from 28/29-9-
2018 as Lecturer (LB) and as per clause 4 of order dated 30-6-2018, services of the petitioners on the post of Lecturer (LB) cadre will be counted from the date of absorption i.e. 1-7-2018 and thus, the petitioners have not completed the qualifying period of 5 years on the post of Lecturer (LB), therefore, they cannot be considered for the promotional post of Principal and as such, their writ petitions are liable to be dismissed.
5. Rejoinder has been filed pursuant to the return filed by the State / respondents controverting the submissions made in the return. No additional return has been filed on behalf of the State / respondents.
6. Mr. Anup Majumdar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.(S)Nos.4341/2020 & 1472/2021, would submit that the petitioners W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 12 of 32 have filed these writ petitions for consideration of their services rendered as Lecturer (Panchayat) for the purposes of promotion only, as the service period rendered as Lecturer (Panchayat) has been considered for calculating contributory pension and other benefits which is nowhere expressly said to be excluded by the Rules of 2019 and it cannot be ignored by the State. It has also been submitted by Mr. Majumdar, learned counsel, that by virtue of Rule 12(2)(c) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961, the person who is working on transfer or deputation in another department and if he is absorbed later, his seniority in the grade in which he is absorbed will normally be counted from the date of absorption in his parent department, then his regular service in the grade shall also be taken into account while fixing his seniority in the present department. Since the Panchayat Department with whom the petitioners were earlier working and the School Education Department where subsequently they have been absorbed are two wings of the State Government, therefore, the services rendered by the petitioners on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I prior to their absorption cannot be ignored for counting 5 years service on the post of Lecturer (LB). He would further submit that absorption of the petitioners was not choice, but a compulsory one rendering all the posts of Teachers of Panchayat and Urban Administration as dying cadre. He would rely upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in the matters of A.P. State Electricity Board and others v. R. Parthasarathi and others1, Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri and another v. V.M. Joseph 2, Renu Mullick 1 (1998) 9 SCC 425 2 (1998) 5 SCC 305 W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 13 of 32 (Smt) v. Union of India and another 3, Dwijen Chandra Sarkar and another v. Union of India and others4, Vinod Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and another5, Union of India and another v. V.N. Bhat 6 and also upon the decisions of the M.P. High Court in the matters of Hemchandra Pandey (Dr.) and others v. State of M.P. and others 7, Chhogalal s/o Gattuji Solanki v. State of M.P. and others 8 and State of M.P. v. K.M. Mishra and others9 in support of his contention.
7. Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Mr. Hariom Rai and Mr. Prateek Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in other writ petitions, would adopt the submission made by Mr. Anup Majumdar, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(S)Nos.4341/2020 & 1472/2021.
8. Mr. Amrito Das, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State / respondents, would submit that the petitioners were earlier appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I by the Zila Panchayats which has been subsequently named as Lecturer (Panchayat) and Lecturers (Panchayat) were admittedly not the holders of civil post as held by this Court in W.A.No.215/2017 (Harnarayan Yadav v. Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission and another), decided on 7-1-2019, and as such, the petitioners were not appointed to civil post or to a Government Department prior to their absorption and they were absorbed pursuant to the policy decision taken by the State Government vide circular dated 30-6-2018 in which it has been categorically provided that all consequential benefits upon absorption 3 (1994) 1 SCC 373 4 (1999) 2 SCC 119 5 (2001) 4 SCC 675 6 (2003) 8 SCC 714 7 2008(3) M.P.L.J. 6 8 2008(2) M.P.L.J. 566 9 2009(3) M.P.L.J. 642 W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 14 of 32 to the School Education Department shall be computed from the date of absorption i.e, 1-7-2018, meaning thereby, the past service rendered by the petitioners in Zila Panchayat as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I / Lecturer (Panchayat) shall not be computed for any purpose which the petitioners have accepted and submitted their employee details as well as filled upon the National Subscriber Registration Form for National Pension System and they did not submit any option form for opting out from the scheme of absorption, whereby they would have continued as Lecturer (Panchayat) under the Zila Panchayat. Mr. Das, learned State counsel, would further submit that the petitioners without any demur have accepted the terms of absorption and did not assail / challenge the order dated 30-6-2018, rather accepted the said terms and thus, have attained / conferred with the status of Government service / holder of civil post with effect from 1-7-2018. He would also submit that admittedly, the petitioners did not complete five years experience on the post of feeder cadre being Lecturer for their consideration to be promoted to the post of Principal under the Rules of 2019, as Rule 15(1) of the Rules of 2019 clearly provides that eligibility for promotion shall require the person to have completed such number of years of service "on the post" from which promotion is to be made as specified in column 3 of Schedule- IV. Since the petitioners have not completed 5 years service on the post of Lecturer from the date of their absorption on 1-7-2018 by order dated 28-9-2018, therefore, they have rightly not been considered for the post of Principal and the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. Mr. Das, learned State counsel, would contend that prescription of experience of five years for a Lecturer to be promoted to the post of W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 15 of 32 Principal is teaching experience on the post of Lecturer in the feeder cadre and not anywhere else. The petitioners' experience as Lecturer (Panchayat) cannot be treated as due experience to satisfy the rigors of Rule 15 and Schedule-IV of the Rules of 2019, since it is not on the post of Lecturer, which is the feeder cadre, where the petitioners are born only on 1-7-2018 and not before. If the contention of the petitioners that their past service on the post of Lecturer (Panchayat) has to be considered for computing the experience of five years is accepted, the necessary corollary would mean that the petitioners were entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Principal immediately on the date of absorption to the post of Lecturer under the State Government Service, irrespective of having not held a civil post for even a day prior to the date of absorption. Mr. Das, learned State counsel, would rely upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in the matters of State of Punjab and others v. Harnam Singh and others 10, Yogendra Prasad Mandal v. State of Bihar and others 11, Union of India and others v. K. Savitri and others 12 and Indu Shekhar Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others13 to buttress his submission.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the record with utmost circumspection.
10. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were earlier appointed on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I by the respective Zila Panchayats in accordance with the provisions contained in the Chhattisgarh 10 (1997) 3 SCC 32 11 (1998) 3 SCC 137 12 (1998) 4 SCC 358 13 (2006) 8 SCC 129 W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 16 of 32 Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997. Thereafter, with effect from 17-8-2012, the Chhattisgarh Teacher (Panchayat) Cadre (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012 have been promulgated prescribing the rules for recruitment and conditions of service of Shiksha Karmi appointed by the Zila Panchayat and Janpad Panchayat. The nomenclature of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I was also changed to that of Lecturer (Panchayat). On 30-6-2018, the State Government has formulated a scheme under a policy decision for absorption of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I (Lecturer), who had completed more than 8 years of service with effect from 1-7-2018 into the School Education Department, which states as under: -
ससंवविललियन नवनलरश नकन.-01 छत्तीसगढ़ शासन स्कू्ल शशका विभाग मंत्राल य, महानदी भिन नया रायपुर // आदेश // नया रायपुर, वदनाँक 30/06/2018 क्रमांक एफ्र/12/03/2018/20-दो राज्य शासन के वनिरर य अनुसार एतद्द्वारा शासकाय शाल ाां मे कायर रत शशकक(पंचायत/नगरी वनकाय) जजिनका सेिाये 01 जिुल ाई 2018 को 08 िरर या उससे अधधक पू्िरर हो चुका है, का सेिाां का वदनॉक 01 जिुल ाई 2018 से स्कू्ल शशका विभाग मे संविलल यन वकया जिाता है।
संविलल यन का सेिा शतर वनिमनानुसार है-
1/ संविलल यन वकये गये शशकक (पं./न.वन.) संिगर स्कू्ल शशका विभाग मे शशकक(एल .बी.) संिगर के नाम से जिाने जिायेगे ।
2/ स्कू्ल शशका विभाग अंतगर त पू्िर से संचालल त शाल ाां मे जिहाँ ई-संिगर के शशकक पदस्क है, उन शाल ाां मे पदस्क शशकक (पं./न.वन.) संिगर , निीन नाम शशकक ई(एल .बी.) संिगर के तका जिहाँ टी-संिगर के शशकक W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 17 of 32 पदस्क है, उन शाल ाां मे पदस्क शशकक (पं./न.वन.) संिगर , निीन नाम शशकक टी(एल .बी.) संिगर के अंतगर त होगे एिं इनका कैडर पृकक-पृकक होगा ।
3/ शशकक (एल .बी) संिगर को वदनाँक 01 जिुल ाई 2018 से 7 िे िेतन आयोग का राज्य शासन द्वारा समय-समय पर स्िीकृत अनुशंसाां के अनुरूप िेतन एिं अ्य सुविधाएँ देय होगी ।
4/ शशकक (एल .बी.) संिगर को देय समस्त ल ाभ के लल ये सेिा का गिरना संविलल यन वदनाँक 01 जिुल ाई 2018 से का जिायेगी ।
5/ वदनाँक 01 जिुल ाई 2018 के पू्िर का अिधध के लल ये वकसी भी पकार के एररययर का पात्रता नही होगी ।
6/ शशकक (एल .बी.) संिगर को निीन अंशदायी पेशन योजिना का पात्रता होगी।
7/ शशकक (एल .बी.) संिगर का भतर, पदोन्नधत एिं सेिा वनयम स्कू्ल शशका विभाग द्वारा पृकक से बनाए जिाकर अधधसू्धचत वकये जिायेगे ।
8/ वकसी भी अ्य विभाग के सेिा एिं भतर वनयमो मे यवद इस आदेश के अंतगर त वनिमत वनयमो से असंगत कोई वनयम अकिा पािधान हो, तो िे वनयम या पािधान इस आदेश के पािधानो का सीमा तक संशोधधत माने जिाएं गे । संबंधधत विभाग इस आदेश के पािधानो से संगत अनुकू् ल न आदेश अपने सेिा भतर वनयमो मे यकासस्कधत अविल ंब शावमल कराएगा ।
9/ शशकक (पं./न.वन.) संिगर के जिारी वनयुवक आदेश के विरूू यवद वकसी ्यायाल य मे पकरिर विचाराधीन है , तो उनका संविलल यन ्यायाल यीन वनिरर के अ्ययाधीन रहेगा ।
यह आदेश ततकाल पभािशील होगा ।
छत्तीसगढ़ के राज्यपाल के नाम से तका आदेशानुसार सही/-
(गौरि वद्विेदी) सधचि छत्तीसगढ़ शासन स्कू्ल शशका विभाग
11. A careful perusal of clause 4 of order dated 30-6-2018 would show that for grant of all consequential benefits, computation of service W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 18 of 32 shall be done from the date of absorption i.e. 1-7-2018. Later-on, on 6-7-2018, a circular was issued by the State Government directing all the concerned officers to ensure necessary compliances for streamlining the process of absorption, wherein an option form was circulated to those Lecturers (Panchayat), who did not intend to get absorbed in the School Education Department. It was also directed that those Lecturers (Panchayat), who intended absorption into the School Education Department, will have to furnish necessary employee details in the prescribed format along with submission of an application for subscribing under the National Pension Scheme.
Accordingly, the services of the petitioners were absorbed in the School Education Department on the post of Lecturer E(LB) by order dated 28-9-2018 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Director, Public Instructions with effect from 1-7-2018. Thereafter, on 5-3-2019, the Rules of 2019 were promulgated by the State Government prescribing for the recruitment and promotion rules in the School Education Services under the School Education Department. Rule 4(d) of the Rules of 2019 clearly provides for applicability of the Rules of 2019 to the persons absorbed who have completed eight years of service and who have not given the option of continuing in the employer department and have been included in the service through absorption. Rule 4(d) of the Rules of 2019 states as under: -
"4. Constitution of the service.-The service shall consist of the following persons, namely:-
(a) to (c) xxx xxx xxx
(d) Persons, who were recruited by the provisions of Chhattisgarh Teacher (Panchayat) Cadre (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012 under the W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 19 of 32 notification of Panchyat and Rural Development Department, dated 17th August, 2012 and recruited by the provisions of Chhattisgarh Shikshak (Nagriya Nikay) Samvarg (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2013 under the notification of Urban Administration and Development Department, dated 08th March, 2013 and have completed eight years of service and those have not given the option of continuing in the employer department and have been included in the service through absorption."
12. Rule 15 of the Rules of 2019 provides for conditions regarding eligibility for promotion and sub-rule (1) of Rule 15 states as under: -
"15. Conditions regarding eligibility for promotion.-(1) Subject to the provision of sub-rule (2), the committee shall consider the cases of all persons, who on the first day of January of that year have completed such number of years of service, (whether officiating or substantive), on the posts from which promotion is to be made, as specified in column (3) of Schedule-IV and are within the zone of consideration in accordance with the provisions of sub-rule (2)."
13. Serial No.9 of Schedule-IV enacted under Rules 14 and 15 of the Rules of 2019 relates to Lecturer / Head Master (Middle School) (Trained Post Graduate) and also prescribes minimum experience and eligibility for the post. It states as under: -
Schedule-IV (See rule 14 and 15) S.No. Name of service or Minimum Name of Member of post from which Experience service or Departmental promotion is to be period for post on which Promotion made eligibility for the promotion is Committee post to be done 1 to 8 xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
9. Lecturer/Head Master 05 years Principal xxx xxx xxx (Middle School) Teaching (Trained Post experience Graduate)
14. As such, Serial No.9 of Schedule-IV enacted under Rules 14 and 15 W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 20 of 32 of the Rules of 2019 provides for 5 years teaching experience on the post of Lecturer to be eligible for promotion on the post of Principal. Therefore, prescription for experience of 5 years for a Lecturer to be promoted on the post of Principal is teaching experience on the post of Lecturer in the feeder cadre.
15. The sole question for consideration would be, whether the petitioners, who have been absorbed pursuant to the policy decision of the State Government dated 30-6-2018 in the Department of School Education by order dated 28/29-9-2018 with effect from 1-7-2018, are entitled to be considered for the promotional post of Principal under the Rules of 2019 by taking into account the services rendered by them with the Zila Panchayats without having completed the teaching experience of 5 years on the post of Lecturer (LB) from the date of their absorption?
16. The prescription of five years of teaching experience on the feeder cadre post i.e. Lecturer (Panchayat) as has been prescribed by Rule 15, Schedule-IV, Serial No.9 of the Rules of 2019 is to equip the employer to adjudge the ability, capability, calibre and suitability of a candidate as a Lecturer and then assess as to whether the said candidate is eligible for being considered on the promotional post of Principal.
17. Promotion, in the context of the law relating to service, means advancing or raising an employee to a higher office or rank or post than the one the employee was holding or to a higher scale of pay than the one the employee was enjoying immediately before such promotion. The higher office or rank or post or scale is generally referred to as the promotional post or scale as the case may be. The W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 21 of 32 office or rank or post from which the employee is promoted is referred to as the feeder post. The promotional post is generally a higher post with a higher pay than the feeder post (see Lalit Mohan Deb v. Union of India14). Promotion has to be amongst persons who are borne on a regular cadre in service (see State of Rajasthan v. Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi15). Officers belonging to a different cadre of the State service cannot claim promotion to a post required to be filled by promotion of officers belonging to another cadre (see Gopal Singh v. State Cadre Forest Officers' Assn.16). In the matter of Tarsem Singh v. State of Punjab17, their Lordships of the Supreme Court have propounded the meaning of promotion in these words:
"Promotion as understood under the service law jurisprudence means advancement in rank, grade or both. Promotion is always a step towards advancement to a higher position, grade or honour. Opting to come to a lower pay scale or to a lower post cannot be considered a promotion, it is rather a demotion."
18. Similarly, an employee has no right to be promoted, he has a right to be considered for promotion. This right to be considered for promotion is one of the "matters relating to employment or appointment" within the meaning of Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India (see General Manager, Southern Railway v. Rangachari18). Although a candidate has a fundamental right to be considered for promotion, it will be available only if he falls within the prescribed zone of consideration. Article 16(1) of the Constitution provides to every employee otherwise eligible for promotion or who comes within the 14 (1973) 3 SCC 862 15 (2009) 12 SCC 49 16 (2007) 9 SCC 369 17 (1994) 5 SCC 392 18 AIR 1962 SC 36 W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 22 of 32 zone of consideration has a fundamental right to be considered for promotion. If such a person is not considered for promotion, then there will be a clear infraction of his fundamental right under Article 16(1) (see Ajit Singh v. State of Punjab19).
19. It will be appropriate to consider the principles relating to working of the promotional process. The factors to be considered would be the zone of consideration, qualifications for promotion including qualifying examinations and qualifying period, seniority-cum-merit or seniority- cum-fitness or merit-cum-seniority, merit, past records and other factors including those which are to be considered as bars to promotion.
20. Since promotion is essentially an employer's prerogative and necessarily involves a matter of choice, the rules or norms of promotion often require that an aspirant for promotion must possess certain qualifications to be eligible for being considered for promotion. A person must be eligible for promotion having regard to the qualifications prescribed for the post before he can be considered for promotion. Likewise, it is the duty of the authority concerned to consider whether the aspirant fulfills the requisite qualifications.
21. In the matter of R. Prabha Devi and others v. Government of India, Through Secretary, Ministry of Personnel and Training, Administrative Reforms and others20 their Lordships of the Supreme Court held as under: -
"15. The rule-making authority is competent to frame rules laying down eligibility condition for promotion to a higher post. When such an eligibility condition has been 19 (1999) 7 SCC 209 20 (1988) 2 SCC 233 W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 23 of 32 laid down by service rules, it cannot be said that a direct recruit who is senior to the promotees is not required to comply with the eligibility condition and he is entitled to be considered for promotion to the higher post merely on the basis of his seniority. The amended rule in question has specified a period of eight years' approved service in the grade of Section Officer as a condition of eligibility for being considered for promotion to Grade I post of CSS. This rule is equally applicable to both the direct recruit Section Officers as well as the promotee Section Officers. The submission that a senior Section Officer has a right to be considered for promotion to Grade I post when his juniors who have fulfilled the eligibility condition are being considered for promotion to the higher post, Grade I, is wholly unsustainable. The prescribing of an eligibility condition for entitlement for consideration for promotion is within the competence of the rule-making authority. This eligibility condition has to be fulfilled by the Section Officers including senior direct recruits in order to be eligible for being considered for promotion. When qualifications for appointment to a post in a particular cadre are prescribed, the same have to be satisfied before a person can be considered for appointment. Seniority in a particular cadre does not entitle a public servant for promotion to a higher post unless he fulfills the eligibility condition prescribed by the relevant rules. A person must be eligible for promotion having regard to the qualifications prescribed for the post before he can be considered for promotion. Seniority will be relevant only amongst persons eligible. Seniority cannot be substituted for eligibility nor it can override it in the matter of promotion to the next higher post. The rule in question which prescribes an uniform period of qualified service cannot be said to be arbitrary or unjust violative of Article 14 or 16 of the Constitution. It has been rightly held by the Tribunal:
"When certain length of service in a particular cadre can validly be prescribed and is so prescribed, unless a person possesses that qualification, he cannot be considered eligible for appointment. There is no law which lays down that a senior in service would automatically be eligible for promotion. Seniority by itself does not outweigh experience.""
22. Experience is a commonly required eligibility factor. Experience means knowledge or skill acquired out of practical acquaintance with W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 24 of 32 facts or events. In Black's Law Dictionary the word 'experience' is given the following meaning:
"A state, extent, or duration of being engaged in a particular study or work; the real life as contrasted with the ideal or imaginary. A word implying skill, facility, or practical wisdom gained by personal knowledge, feeling, and action, and also the course or process by which one attains knowledge or wisdom."
23. Absence of experience in substantive capacity is not a mere irregularity. Experience in substantive capacity is eligibility criterion for the purpose of promoting to a higher post and the same must strictly be complied with and no deviation is permissible (see R.S. Garg v. State of U.P.21). Similarly, employees on deputation or by way of transfer or holding posts in another cadre are not entitled to claim experience in the excadre posts as experience for the purpose of promotion (see Ram Saran v. State of Punjab22).
24. In Ram Saran (supra), their Lordships of the Supreme Court have held that if the government employee was on deputation or holding a post in another cadre, the lien shall revive as soon as he ceased to hold the post in another cadre, and observed as under: -
"21. If the government employee was on deputation or holding a post in another cadre, the lien shall revive as soon as he ceased to hold the post in another cadre. There is no revival of the lien during the period the employee continues to hold a post in another cadre. Therefore, during the period the suspension is operative, the employee cannot claim that he had been continuing in the post in the parent cadre and gaining experience. When the rule is clear and specific that for the purpose of promotion from the cadre of Superintendents, Assistant, Accountants, Senior Scale Stenographers to the post of Excise and Taxation Officers, the eligibility qualification is 21 (2006) 6 SCC 430 22 (1991) 2 SCC 253 W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 25 of 32 "experience of working 'as such' for five years", the employee is not entitled to claim the experience in the ex- cadre as experience of working in the ministerial cadre."
25. Reverting to the facts of the case in the light of the principles of law relating to consideration of a Government servant for promotional post, it is quite vivid that the Rules of 2019 are applicable for promotion to the post of Principal by virtue of Rule 15 read with Schedule-IV, S.No.9, in the feeder post and in order to be eligible for promotion on the post of Principal from Lecturer / person holding feeder post, 5 years teaching experience on the post of Lecturer is sine qua non and unless a Lecturer has 5 years teaching experience in his parent Department (School Education Department), which is the minimum teaching experience for eligibility for the post of Principal, he is not eligible and cannot be considered for the post of Principal. Admittedly and undisputedly, the petitioners were absorbed in the Department of School Education with effect from 1-7-2018 pursuant to the policy decision taken by the State Government on 30-6-2018. Clause 4 of the policy dated 30-6-2018 categorically provides that for grant of all consequential benefits, computation of service shall be done from the date of absorption i.e. 1-7-2018. On the petitioners' own showing, they have not completed 5 years teaching experience on the post of Lecturer as they have been absorbed only with effect from 1-7-2018 and they are legally obliged to have 5 years teaching experience as per Rule 15 read with Schedule-IV, S.No.9, of the Rules of 2019 for making them eligible to be considered for the promotional post of Principal. Their previous experience as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I in the respective Zila Panchayats cannot be considered for the promotional post of Principal, as they have born in the cadre of W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 26 of 32 Lecturer (Local Body) with effect from 1-7-2018.
26. A Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.215/2017 (Harnarayan Yadav v. Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission and another), decided on 7-1-2019, has clearly held that Shiksha Karmi is not the holder of civil post under the State and once they are not holding civil post under the State, their past services on the post of Shiksha Karmi cannot be considered as teaching experience in the Department of School Education. Otherwise, if that contention is accepted that their past service on the post of Shiksha Karmi, later-on renamed as Lecturer (Panchayat) is to be considered for computing teaching experience of 5 years, the necessary corollary would mean that the petitioners were entitled to be considered for promotion on the post of Principal immediately on the date of absorption to the post of Lecturer with effect from 1-7-2018, irrespective of the fact that they have never held the civil post under the State and the Rules of 2019 came into force with effect from 5-3-2019 and the employer of the petitioners now, the State Government, did not have any opportunity to observe the performance of the petitioners viz., ability, capability, calibre and suitability on the post of Lecturer (Panchayat) and thereby, the very purpose of prescribing five years teaching experience on the post of Lecturer which is the feeder cadre would be defeated and that would not be in consonance with the Rules of 2019. Thus, the employer / State Government would be completely denude of its authority and forced to consider and promote the petitioners without adjudging their ability, capability, calibre and suitability, as, as on today, the petitioners do not have five years experience on the post of Lecturer (LB).
W.P.(S)No.4341/2020
and other connected cases Page 27 of 32
27. The petitioners without any protest or demur accepted the policy dated 30-6-2018 and got themselves absorbed with effect from 1-7-2018 and thereafter, the Rules of 2019 came into force on 5-3-2019 and they are being governed by the Rules of 2019 without questioning the Rules of 2019. As on today, as per S.No.9 of Schedule-IV enacted under Rules 14 and 15 of the Rules of 2019, in order to get promotion on the post of Principal, minimum five years teaching experience on the post of Lecturer is sine qua non, which the petitioners have admittedly not completed as on this date, as they have become Lecturers only with effect from 1-7-2018 and as such, they cannot be considered for promotion on the post of Principal. {See Harnam Singh's case (supra) and Indu Shekhar Singh (supra).}
28. In view of the aforesaid finding, the decisions relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioners in A.P. State Electricity Board (supra), V.M. Joseph's case (supra), Renu Mullick (Smt.) (supra), Dwijen Chandra Sakrar (supra), Vinod Kumar Sharma (supra) and V.N. Bhat's case (supra) are clearly inapplicable and / or distinguishable on the facts of the present case.
29. The next submission of Mr. Majumdar, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(S)Nos.4341/2020 & 1472/2021, is based on Rule 12(2)(c) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961 (for short, 'the Rules of 1961') and he relied upon the decisions of the M.P. High Court in Hemchandra Pandey (Dr.) (supra) and Chhogalal (supra) and the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana and another v. Deepak Sood and others23. Rule 12(2)(c) of the Rules of 1961 states as under: -
23 Civil Appeal No.4446/2008, decided on 15-7-2008 W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 28 of 32 "12. Seniority.--The seniority of the members of a service or a distinct branch or group of posts of that service shall be determined in accordance with the following principles, viz.,--
(1) xxx xxx xxx
xxx xxx xxx
xxx xxx xxx
(2) Seniority of Transferees.--
(a) and (b) xxx xxx xxx
(c) In the case of a person who is initially taken on deputation and absorbed later (i.e. where the relevant recruitment rules provide for "transfer on deputation / transfer") his seniority in the grade in which he is absorbed will normally be counted from the date of absorption. If he has however been holding already (on the date or absorption) the same or equivalent grade on regular basis, in his parent department, such regular service in the grade shall also be taken into account in fixing his seniority, subject to the condition that he will be given seniority, from the date he has been holding the post on deputation or the date from which he has been appointed on a regular basis to the same or equivalent grade in his present department whichever is later.
Explanation.--The fixation of seniority of a transferee in accordance with the above rule will not however affect any regular promotions to the next higher grade made prior to the date of such absorption. In other words it will be operative only in filling up of vacancies in higher grade taking place after such absorption."
30. Part of Rule 12(2)(c) of the Rules of 1961 starting from "subject to the condition that he will be given seniority, from the date he has been holding the post on deputation or the date from which he has been appointed on a regular basis to the same or equivalent grade in his present department whichever is later" has been struck down by a Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Devsharan Dilliwar and W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 29 of 32 others v. High Court of Chhattisgarh and others24.
31. A careful perusal of the aforesaid rule would show that Rule 12(2)(c) as amended with effect from 2nd April, 1998 relates to counting of past service of employee referred in equivalent post for determining seniority qua transfer on deputation to another department and absorption in that department.
32. The rule-making authority is competent to frame rules laying down eligibility condition for promotion to a higher post. Similarly, the prescribing of an eligibility condition for entitlement for consideration for promotion is within the competence of the rule-making authority. This eligibility condition has to be fulfilled by the person seeking promotion in higher post in order to be eligible for being considered for promotion. When qualifications for appointment to a post in a particular cadre are prescribed, the same have to be satisfied before a person can be considered for appointment. Seniority in a particular cadre does not entitle a public servant for promotion to a higher post unless he fulfills the eligibility condition prescribed by the relevant rules. A person must be eligible for promotion having regard to the qualifications prescribed for the post before he can be considered for promotion. Seniority will be relevant only amongst persons eligible. Seniority cannot be substituted for eligibility nor it can override it in the matter of promotion to the next higher post. {See R. Prabha Devi (supra).}
33. Reverting to the facts of the case in the light of the aforesaid legal position, the argument based on Rule 12(2)(c) of the Rules of 1961 is of no advantage to the learned counsel for the petitioners as it relates 24 W.P.No.3926/2005, decided on 19-10-2011 W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 30 of 32 to seniority of a transferee as by virtue Rule 12(2)(c) relevant seniority of persons appointed by transfer from one department to another department of the State Government shall be determined in accordance with the order of their selection for transfer and Rule 12(2)
(c) deals with one of the contingencies i.e. transfer on deputation to another department and absorption in that department. As such, seniority is not an issue in this batch of writ petitions, therefore, the argument based on Rule 12(2)(c) is not relevant as held by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in R. Prabha Devi (supra) wherein it was held that a person must be eligible for promotion having regard to the qualifications prescribed for the post before he can be considered for promotion, seniority will be relevant only amongst persons eligible and seniority cannot be substituted for eligibility. It has already been held that the petitioners are ineligible as per S.No.9 of Schedule-IV enacted under Rules 14 and 15 of the Rules of 2019 according to which minimum five years teaching experience on the post of Lecturer (LB) is quite essential being the feeder post for claiming promotion on the post Principal. Admittedly, the petitioners did not have the said eligibility qualification in terms of five years experience on the post of Lecturer (LB), they are not entitled to be considered for promotion and Rule 12(2)(c) of the Rules of 1961 would not confer any benefit to the petitioners. No other argument has been pressed into service.
34. In that view of the matter, the decisions of the M.P. High Court in Hemchandra Pandey (Dr.) (supra), Chhogalal (supra), K.M. Mishra's case (supra) and that of the Supreme Court in Deepak Sood's case (supra), relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioners, are also clearly distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the present W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 31 of 32 case.
35. As a fallout and consequence of the aforesaid discussion, this batch of writ petitions is devoid of merit. The writ petitions deserve to be dismissed and are accordingly dismissed. The petitioners in W.P.(S) No.1472/2021 are saddled with cost of ₹ 20,000/- for unnecessarily delaying the recruitment process.
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma W.P.(S)No.4341/2020 and other connected cases Page 32 of 32 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.4341 of 2020 Rajesh Sharma and others Versus State of Chhattisgarh and others and other connected matters Head Note For promotion on the post of Principal, five years teaching experience on the post of Lecturer is sine qua non as per Schedule-IV enacted under Rules 14 and 15 of the Chhattisgarh School Education Services (Educational and Administrative Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2019.