YOGA LAL MISHRA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS AND RAJBHASHA, GOVT. OF JHARKHAND AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed as Sub -Deputy Collector in 1976 at Daltonganj, Palamau, thereafter, the petitioner appeared in 24 Batch Examination, conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission, for the post of Deputy Collector. The petitioner was also selected for the post of Deputy Collector, but, meanwhile the two different cadres namely the cadre of Sub -Deputy Collector and the cadre of Deputy Collector were merged and a new cadre was created as Deputy Collector and, therefore, the petitioner had never obtained to be appointed as a fresh Deputy Collector as he has cleared examination, conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission as there is merger of the two posts, the petitioner will loose the seniority lb the post of Deputy Collector. Two cadres have been kept separate, distinct and different. The petitioner would have obtained to be appointed as Deputy Collector under the 24rd Batch Examination, conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission, otherwise the petitioner is losing the seniority for the several years. The respondents are still considering the case of the petitioner for the post of Deputy Collector and the seniority, therein, as per 23rd Batch Examination, conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission These facts have been stated in Paragraph 13 of the counter affidavit, filed by the respondents and, therefore, let a direction may be given to the respondents to consider the case of he petitioner by treating this writ petition with all annexures as a representation for the claim of the petitioner that the petitioner is claiming the seniority for the post of Deputy Collector on the basis of 23rd Batch Examination, conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission and not as per 24 Batch Examination, conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission because of merger of the two different cadres, namely, Sub Deputy Collector and Deputy Collector.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the respondents, who has submitted that now a detailed counter affidavit has been filed and as per Paragraph 13, whatever is decided by the respondents is a tentative decision and the seniority list dated 20 February, 2008 is in its draft stage and the same has not yet been finalised and, therefore, final decision will be taken by considering nil the arguments, canvassed by the petitioner in this writ petition.

(3.) THE petition is, hereby, disposed of, in view of the aforesaid observations end directions.