MAHESH JHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are five petitioners in this case. They seek to challenge the directions given by the Collector, Sitamarhi to return their services from different Panchayat Samities to the Zila Parishad, Sitamarhi and to recover from the petitioners the salary paid to them in the capacity as Government servant while they worked in the Panchayat Samities on being transferred from the Zila Parishad. The impugned directions are contained in letter no. 212, dated 9.2.1994 (Annexure 5) issued by the Collector to the Deputy Development Commissioner -cum -Chief Executive Officer and Secretary, Zila Parishad, Sitamarhi.

(2.) PETITIONERS 1 to 4 were appointed, on different dates as Road Peons in the District Board, Muzaffarpur and were posted to work in the different blocks as stated in the writ petition; petitioner no.5 was appointed as a Road Peon in the District Board, Sitamarhi and was posted to work at Belsand block. It appears that after the abolition of the District Board, Sitamarhi with effect from 14.11.1998 the Deputy Development Commissioner took up correspondence with the Panchayati Raj Directorate regarding the adjustment/absorption of the petitioners. In reply to his letter dated 2.6.1988, he received a letter, dated 20.8.1988 (Annexure 1/1) from the Director, Panchayati Raj -cum -Addl. Secretary in the Government. In that letter, it has stated that the Road Peons of Sitamarhi Zila Parishad could be posted in Panchayat Samities for collection of bullock cart tax and be given the pay scale of Rs. 180. -193 -338 -342, admissible to the Assessor. It was further stated that their payments would be made from the head "2515 -other rural development programmes -District Panchayat Establishment. On the basis of the letter from the Director, Panchayati Raj, the Deputy Development Commissioner, Sitamarhi by his letter, dated 10.5.1989 (Annexure -1) addressed to the Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Pupri directed for transferring the services of the petitioners to the different Panchayat Samities as indicated in that letter. Pursuant to the letter issued by the Deputy Development Commissioner, the petitioners joined the respective Panchayat Samities and started getting their salary in the pay scale as indicated in the letter of the Director, Panchayati Raj.

(3.) A few years afterwards with the revision of salary of Government employees in terms of the report of the 5th pay revision committee, a question arose regarding the scale of pay that might be given to the petitioners and in course of correspondence on that question it transpired that their transfer to the Panchayat Samities itself was on the basis of a letter was cancelled shortly after its issuance.