MADHURISRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application the petitioner prays for issuance of a direction to the respondents to consider her case for promotion to the post of Labour Enforcement Officer with effect from 30-4-1992 when her juniors have been given such promotion, if necessary, by granting relaxation of the so-called prescribed age-limit for such promotion in the special circumstances of the case and further, to grant her consequential benefits arising therefrom, such as senority and other pecuniary benefits arrears of pay etc.

(2.) In short, the case of the petitioner is that she was initially appointed as social organiser and in the service book her date of birth was recorded as 5th January, 1946. It is stated that the service career of the petitioner has throughout been satisfactory and she has earned remarks in Annual Character Roll as excellent and was also recommended for promotion to the higher post. It is also stated that the petitioner was asked to officiate on the higher post of lady welfare officer from time to time in addition to her own duties. In 1984 a communication was issued vide Government letter No. 167 dated 22-2-1984 by the Joint Labour Commissioner directing all the Departmental officers to forward the names of suitable candidates for consideration of promotion to the higher post of Labour Inspector by 15th March, 1984. The names of only such departmental employees were required to be sent, who were graduate and had completed five years of service and were within 45 years of age. It is stated that the name of the petitioner was also forwarded by tbe Dy. Labour Commissioner, Begusarai as she fulfilled till the aforesaid criteria.

(3.) However, no step was taken thereafter, a notification was issued on 25-1-1991 laying down Rules for appointment/promotion on the post of Labour Enforcement Officeer. The said Rule was known as Labour Enforcement Officer Rules, 1990 and was published in the official Gazette on 25-1-1990, from which date it was brought into force. It is contended that under the said Rules,, the post of Labour Inspector was re-designated as Labour Enforcement Officer remained the same as was with respect to the post of Labour Inspector.