DAYANAND BHAGAT Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed seeking three -fold relief as hereunder:

(2.) THE petitioner is a member of Bihar Agriculture Service Class I holding the post of Additional Director, Agriculture, on substantive basis. He is also presently officiating as Director, Agriculture. It was stated at the Bar that except for a brief spell of three months he has been functioning as Incharge Director since 1992 itself. There was unanimity between the counsel for the parties including the intervenors that the post of Director should be filled up on regular basis. Although doubts were expressed from some quarters regarding eligibility of the petitioner for appointment to the post, I do not wish to go into that question. The eligibility of the petitioner and others is to be considered by the Bihar Public Service Commission and the State Government at the first instance. In that view of the matter counsel for the parties very fairly did not make any serious argument on the point. There was consensus that the case of the petitioner also is to be considered for appointment to the post.

(3.) THE thrust of the argument of the counsel for the parties was whether the petitioner should be allowed to continue as Incharge Director, Agriculture, until regular appointment to the post is made or an officer of IAS/ICAR should be posted/appointed in the meantime. This, indeed, is the scope of this writ petition. It may be mentioned here itself that during the pendency of the case, on 22.5.99 a decision has been taken at the Government level to post two officers of the IAS as Director at Patna and Ranchi. The petitioner filed I.A. No. 7344/99 seeking a restraint order against respondent -State from issuing any notification appointing any IAS officer to the post. On 3.6.99 this Court passed an order of status quo.