BHARAT PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order of the Commissioner -cum -Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Government of Bihar, contained inMemo No. 533 dated 10.3.2000, by which the claim of the petitioner to confirm him on the post of Jeep Driver has been rejected, and for other consequential reliefs. The relevant facts are as follows.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as Khalasi in a work charged establishment, to be precise, Tirhut Canal Division No. 2, Bettiah, in the then Irrigation now Water Resources Department on 22.5.73. Applications were invited from the employees working in the work charged establishment holding driving licence for direct recruitment on the post of Jeep Driver by the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Motihari. The Selection Committee constiuted by the Chief Engineer considers) the cases of 57 candidates, 22 of then were selected. However as three of tehn were posted outside the jurisdiction of tN Chief Engineer, Irrigation, Motihari and three were employed in the regular estab lishment, the Committee finally prepared a panel of 16 candidates including the petitioner who was placed at serial no. 2 On 27.4.81, a memorandum to this effect was put up for orders by the Member Secretary of the Selection Committee. Or 16.5.81 order for appointment was issued On 23.5.81 the petitioner joined the post While he was working on the post of Jeer Driver, on 1.10.85 he was confirmed or the post of Khalasi in the regular estab lishment in terms of the policy decision or the State Government contained in lette No. 3058 dated 22.10.84 of the Finance Department. On 12.10.87 orders were is sued vide Annexures 7 and 8 allowing in crements with effect from 22.5.82 i.e after completion of one year 'sservice and accordingly fixing his pay on the pos of Driver. However on 30.10.87 (on 3.10.87) the same Executive Engineer who had issued Annexures 7 and 8 communicated vide Annexure 9 confrmtion of the petitioner on the post of Khalas vide order dated 1.10.85 (supra). The case of the petitioner is that in the mean time on 11.2.86 and 19.3.86 the Superin tending Engineer of the Circle requesterd the Chief Engineer to make modification in the order dated 1.10.85 by which the petitioner had been confirmed on the post. of Khalasi, and on 18.6.86 the petitioner too made representation in that regard. Instead, on 30.6.88 the petitioner was transferred to Masan Canal Division No 1, Ramnagar on the post of Truck Khalasi. From the records it appears that on 9.7.88 he was relieved from the post of Jeep Driver, Tirhut Canal Division No. 2, Bettiah.

(3.) THE case of the respondents is that as the petitioner was initially engaged on the post of Khalasi in a work charged establishment he could not be regularised/appointed on the post of Driver. Reference has been made to letter nos. 941 dated 19.2.81, 6073 dated 26.9.81 and 517 dated 2.4.83 of the Irrigation Department, enclosed as Annexures A, B and C to the counter affidavit. It is said that no sooner the Chief Engineer realised the mistake he issued order on 1.10.85 regularising the petitioner on the post of Khalasi. The order was assailed by the petitioner in Title Suit No. 198/88 which was eventually dismissed after the injunction order was set aside by the High Court in C.R. No. 1191/91.