RAMASHANKAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner before this Court is an employee of the Bihar State Scheduled Caste Co -operative Development Corporation Limited ( 'the Corporation ' hereinafter). He was holding the rank of Clerk -cum -typist and was posted as Incharge District Executive Officer, Branch Office, Katihar, when by an office order issued by the Corporation 'sAdministrator under his memo no. 1549, dated 8.8.2000 he was reverted to the post of peon. The order of reversion is passed on the ground that his promotion from the post of peon to the rank of Clerk -cum -typist was on the basis of a fake order in the sense that the promotion order was non -existent. It is this office order passed by the Administrator that comes under challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) BEFORE proceeding to take note of the relevant facts of this case, it may be noted here that the appointments and promotions made in the Corporation, specially the appointment and promotion of the present petitioner have been attracting the attention of the members of the Legislative Assembly and on more occasions than one questions were raised in the Assembly in connection with the petitioner 'sappointment as peon and later his promotion to the post of Clerk -cum - typist. On the last occasion question relating to the petitioner 'sappointment and promotion were raised by a member in the 138th sessions of the Assembly. The member 'squestions were sent to the Corporation 'sAdministrator for preparing the answers which the Government might give in the house. A copy of those very questions were served upon the petitioner along with letter no. 1462, dated 25.7.2000 issued by the Administrator directing him to show cause why he should not be reverted to the post of peon. It is important to note here that neither in the show cause nor in the questions raised by the member of the Assembly there was any indication that the petitioners promotion was bad bacause it was based on a fake order, in the sense that the promotion order was not in existence in the office of the Corporation.

(3.) TO the show cause notice, dated 25.7.2000 the petitioner gave his reply on 2.8.2000 whereupon the Administrator passed the impugned order, dated 8.8.2000.