SURYA NANDAN PRASAD SON OF RAM KESHWAR RAM, SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI SON OF BIRENDRA KUMAR DWIVEDI AND SURENDRA KUMAR SON OF LATE SHIV NARAYAN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) L.P.A. No. 300 of 2008 has been preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna by the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 2819 of 2007 Surya Nandan Prasad and Ors. V/s. The State of Bihar and Ors. and is aggrieved by the order dated 14.8.2007, whereby the writ petition has been dismissed, and the order dated 9.9.2004 (Annexure-1/6), whereby respondent Nos. 6 and 7 have been confirmed as Inspector of Factories (Medical), in the Department of Labour, Employment and Training, Government of Bihar, has been upheld. It is further directed against the order dated 7.4.2009 (Annexure-I/7 to I.A. No. 3093 of 2009), passed by the State Government, in the Department of Labour and Employment, passed during the pendency of the present appeal, whereby the objection of the appellants as to the validity of the said order dated 9.9.2004 has been rejected.

(2.) A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the appeal may be indicated. Respondent No. 7 (herein) was appointed as a Member of Bihar Health Service on 9.2.1988 on a substantive basis. By an order of the State Government, he was transferred from the Health Department to the Department of Labour and Employment on 30.6,1988. Similarly, respondent No. 6 was so appointed in Bihar Health Service on 12.1.1990, and was transferred on 27.8.1990. They have continuously functioned as such in the present department as Inspector of Factories (Medical). On the other hand, appellant No. 1, 2 and 3 were appointed as Inspector of Factories in the present department on 2.4.1990, 7.6.1993 and 12.8.1993. The appellants as well as respondent No. 6 were confirmed as Inspector of factories by order dated 12.11.2005 (Annexure G/6) with effect from the dates mentioned against their names. The relevant portion of the order of confirmation is reproduced hereinbelow:

(3.) Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 as well as respondent Nos. 6 and 7 were given the benefit of Assured Career Progression by order dated 6.5.2006 (Annexure-H/6). It is relevant to state that respondent No. 7 was given the benefit of Assured Career Progression with effect from 20.3.2000, respondent No. 6 was given with effect from 22.1.2002, appellant No. 1 was given with effect from 2.4.2002, and appellant No. 2 was given with effect from 7.6.2005. Whether or not appellant No. 3 has been given the benefit of Assured Career Progression is not on record.