LAIITESHWAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There being a common question involved in all these writ applications, counter affidavits and rejoinders having been filed, all necessary parties having appeared, with consent, the cases were taken up for disposal at this stage itself. The dispute relates to Lab Assistant/Lab Technician/Lab Incharge/Lab Instructor working in various Universities established under and controlled by the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976. In short, the dispute arises from a decision taken by the State Cabinet on 6.6.2006 whereby following judicial pronouncements, the State Cabinet decided to redesignate the Lab Assistant/Lab Technician/Lab Incharge/Lab Instructor as Demonstrator. This is being effectively undone by the impugned Circular, hence the writ petitions. The significance of this decision is that Lab Assistant/Lab Technician/Lab Incharge/Lab Instructor is a non-teaching post whereas Demonstrator is a teaching post as defined by Section 2(v) of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 which is quoted hereunder:--

(2.) Once these people became Demonstrators, Demonstrator being Teacher, they would get the promotional opportunities as substantial number of Lab Assistant/Lab Technician/Lab. Incharge/Lab Instructor were Doctorate degree holders though the basic qualification was only Graduation and Intermediate in some cases.

(3.) It is pursuant to this Cabinet decision dated 6.6.2006, which is not disputed, that the Communication No. 1115 dated 14.6.2006 was issued by the Department of Human Resources Development (Higher Education) (Annexure-1 to the first writ petition). This circular clearly states about the decision of the State Government. It clearly states that the Government has taken a conscious decision that the Lab Assistant/Lab Technician/Lab Incharge/Lab Instructor, on acquiring requisite academic qualification, being redesignated as Demonstrator, the post of Demonstrator would continue till their superannuation and upon their superannuation, the post of Demonstrator would stand surrendered. In paragraph-3 of the Circular, it was clearly stated that pursuant to redesignation of these persons as Demonstrators, they would be entitled to all benefits and promotional rights of the Demonstrator. There was no ambiguity in the said communication.