RAMSAGAR ROY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Ramsagar Roy, the sole petitioner in this writ case, has obtained a rule against the State of Bihar (respondent no. 1), Dr. Jaynarayan Misra (respondent no. 2) and the Bihar Public Service Commission (respondent no. 3) to show cause why the recommendations of respondent no. 3 and the notification dated the 19th August 1969, a copy of which is Annexure '2' to the writ application, issued by respondent no. 1 appointing respondent no. 2 to the post of Director of Agriculture, Bihar, be not called up and quashed. Cause has been shown on behalf of respondents 1 and 3 by the Government Pleader no. 1 and on behalf of respondent no. 2 by Mr. Radha Raman. Mr. Balabhadra Prasad Singh has appeared in support of the rule. The petitioner entered service under the Government of Bihar as an Agricultural Overseer en the 13th of December, 1935. On the 1st November, 1945, he was promoted to Class II service, and he got Class I post permanently on the 4th of May, 1949. Respondent no. 2, on the other hand, entered service as an Agricultural Overseer on the 13th of July, 1943. He was promoted to Class II on the 13th March, 1950 and to Class I on the 25th of April, 1952, in which class he was confirmed on the 1st of March, 1956. To this extent, the facts are not in dispute that in Class I service, the petitioner was senior to respondent no. 2.

(2.) It appears from the statement in the show cause petition filed by respondent no. 2 and the counter -affidavits filed on behalf of the other respondents and the annexures appended to them that some special posts were created outside the cadre and at the relevant time in or about the year 1955, these special posts were in the pay scale of Rs. 800 -1150. The revised scale of these posts soon became Rs. 900 -1400/ -. On the 13th of March, 1956, the petitioner was appointed Principal of the Ranchi Agricultural College and Regional Director of Agricultural Research Institute, Ranchi. At the time of his initial appointment, the pay scale was. Rs. 800 -1150 which, subsequently, became Rs. 900 -1400. From Ranchi, he was transferred as Principal of Bihar Agricultural College, Sabour, where he was confirmed in the post on the 2nd of April, 1960. He was also drawing a special pay of Rs. 200/ - in that post and had been provided with rent -free quarters as well. The corresponding history of the appointment of respondent no. 2 during that period is like this. The special post of Director of Agricultural Education also had the initial pay scale of Rs. 800 -1150 which was later revised to Rs. 900 -1400. Respondent no. 2 was appointed on probation for a period of two years in the post of Director of Agricultural Education on the 1st of September, 1959. He was confirmed in that post on the 1st of September, 1961. One of the points of dispute between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 in regard to their seniority inter se in the special post - -the pay scale of which was initially Rs. 800 -1150 and on revision Rs. 900 -1400 - -is that, according to the case of the petitioner, since he had continuously officiated in such post from the 13th March, 1956, on confirmation on the 2nd April, 1960 he will get advantage of his continuous officiation and will rank senior to respondent no. 2. The case of the latter, on the other hand, is that according to the Government instructions contained in Appendix 1 dated the 20th April, 1919, from the Director of Agriculture, Bihar, to all officers subordinate to him, a copy whereof is Annexure 'D' to the counter -affidavit of respondent no. 2, on his confirmation to the special post aforesaid on the 1st September, 1961, the previous date, that is, the 1st September, 1959, would be the date of his substantive appointment for the purpose of determining his seniority; and, the petitioner having been appointed either in the temporary post or temporarily could not count his period of officiation prior to the 2nd April, 1960, for the purpose of determination of his seniority. It is not necessary for me to decide this dispute between them in this case, but the purpose of mentioning this dispute is as will appear from my judgment hereinafter.

(3.) The third stage of dispute between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 is that the pay scale of the special post of the Director of Agricultural Education which respondent no. 2 was holding in the scale of Rs. 900 -1400 was upgraded by the State Government on and from the 12th of March, 1966, and the scale of Rs. 900 -1400 was enhanced to the scale of Rs. 1200 -1700. By such upgrading, according to Rule 82 of the Bihar Service Code, respondent no. 2 became entitled to the said scale of pay from the 12th of March, 1966. According to respondent no. 2, the petitioner has been temporarily appointed to such a special post as Director of Extension Services on the 10th of June, 1968, in the pay scale of Rs. 1200 -1700 and, therefore, he claims that in as much as in this higher pay scale post he has been for a longer period than the petitioner, he is senior to the petitioner. The case of the petitioner, on the other hand, in this regard is that at the time the applications were invited for appointment to the post of Director of Agricultural Education, he was in a special post and was getting the same salary which was attached to the post of Director of Agricultural Education. Over and above that, the petitioner had the facility of free quarters and special pay of Rs. 200/ -. The mere upgrading of the pay of the post of the Director of Agricultural Education on the 12th March, 1966, would not make respondent no. 2 senior to the petitioner, rather he filed his representations before the State Government for giving him the same scale of pay, that is, Rs. 1200 -1700, from the 12th March, 1966, the date from which, according to him, his junior officer, respondent no. 2, was given that pay. This is again a question which I do not think it necessary or advisable to determine in this case.