COSMOS JOHN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks quashing of the orders dated 24-4-1997 and 21-10-1998 by which his request to regularise the periods 1-8-1984 to 31-12-1986 and 1 -8-1979 to 4-7-1988 as part of his service, fix his pay and give him service benefits including second time bound promotion, accordingly, has been rejected.

(2.) Shorn of details, the petitioner was appointed as a Veterinary Assistant Surgeon in the Animal Husbandry Department of the State Government on 28-4-1959. During his tenure at Baghmara, district Dhanbad, as Veterinary Surgeon in 1979 he got a job offer as Veterinary Officer in the Republic of Zambia and applied for leave (wrongly described as deputation). The case of the petitioner is that his application was duly forwarded by the authorities and after 'no objection' etc. he was relieved by the District Animal Husbandry Officer, Dhanbad on 31 -7-1979 for going to Zambia. The petitioner joined the assignment as Veterinary Officer at Ndola Dairy Farm on 1-9-1979. The case of the petitioner is that he applied for extension of the period through proper channel, namely, the Indian High Commission at Lusaka. As the authorities of the Ndola Dairy Farm wanted him to continue, they did not relieve him from the assignment. After the petitioner was finally relieved by the employer on 31-12-1986 he returned to India and submitted his joining report in the Directorate of Animal Husbandry on 12-1-1987 along with necessary certificates. The Animal Husbandry Department took advice from the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department. The said Department took the view that under Rule 267(b) of the Bihar Service Code, in all transfers outside India the concurrence of the Government of India was essential and therefore, if the Finance Department agrees, post facto concurrence of the Government of India may be obtained. In anticipation of the decision of the Government of India the petitioner's joining was accepted on his giving undertaking that he would abide by the decision of the Government and the provisions of the Bihar Service Code on 5-7-1988. The Government of India however declined to concur in the proposal and in the circumstances the Finance Department withheld its consent leading to the impugned orders.

(3.) It is relevant to mention here that after the Government of India communicated its decision dated 11-10-1994, the petitioner had moved this Court in CWJC No. 9105/95 with a prayer to fix his salary taking into account the period of 'foreign service' from 1-9-1979 to 31-12-1986. The petitioner thereafter filed representation which was rejected by the Government by the impugned order dated 24-4-1997. Another representation also went in vain with the passing of the second impugned order dated 21-10-1998.