ARUN KUMAR, Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for direction to confirm/regularize the service of the petitioners since 09.12.1986 and to pay annual increment with effect from the said date in the light of the order dated 08.09.2006 and 29.01.2014 passed in CWJC No.10680 of 2000 and Civil Review No.61 of 2008 respectively. The further prayer is made for recalculating the salary and other benefits of the petitioners after giving annual increment since 09.12.1986 and to pay the entire consequential arrears of salary and other monetary benefits.

(2.) Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 were appointed in Gaya Engineering College on the post of Laboratory Assistant whereas the petitioner nos.3 and 4 were appointed on the Class-IV post in the said Engineering College on different dates. The dates of joining are disclosed at para no.7 of the writ petition. In the unified State of Bihar the private engineering colleges were taken over by the State of Bihar by virtue of Bihar Private Engineering College [Taken Over Ordinance], 1986. The said ordinance was again promulgated in the year 1987 and was published on 18.04.1987. By virtue of the provisions enshrined in the said ordinance the State of Bihar took over three engineering colleges namely, Indian College of Engineering, Motihai, JMIT, Darbhanga and Magadh Engineering, Gaya. The ordinance took the shape of the Act in the year 1991 and was known as Bihar Private Engineering College [Taken Over] Act, 1991. The engineering colleges were taken over by the State of Bihar with effect from 09.12.1986. Under Clause 5(i) of the said ordinance the employees of the said engineering college were treated as ad-hoc employees and accordingly, the petitioners were treated as ad-hoc employees in the Gaya Engineering College since 09.12.1986. The screening committee was constituted in the light of the Ordinance which recommended for regularisation of the service of the petitioners and other employees, i.e., teaching and nonteaching, with effect from 31.01.1991 and also recommended for termination of other ad-hoc employees, i.e., teaching and non-teaching, who were working since 09.12.1986 on the ground of over age. They were terminated with effect from 31.01.1991. The petitioners' services were confirmed and regularized with effect from 31.01.1991 and they have been give annual increment and all monetary benefits of permanent employees from the same date. The petitioners were transferred to other places. At the time of re-organization of the State of Bihar and Jharkhand the petitioners were posted at Govt. Polytechnic Adityapur within the territory of State of Jharkhand and subsequently their services were given to the State of Jharkhand in the cadre division. The persons whose services were terminated vide order dated 31.01.1991 moved before the Hon'ble Patna High Court in CWJC No.10680 of 2000 [Sanath Kumar Pandey & Ors.]. In the said case, Hon'ble Patna High Court held that the petitioners were entitled to the benefits of annual increments from the date of take-over of the colleges, i.e., from 09.12.1986 as well as continuity in service for all the years including for the period during which they were out of service on account of termination holding that calculation would be notionally from 31.01.1991 till 05.09.1996. The State of Bihar filed Civil Review No.61 of 2008 for reviewing the order dated 08.09.2006 passed in CWJC No.10680 of 2000 which was dismissed on 29.01.2014 confirming the order passed in the writ petition. Pursuant to the order dated 08.09.2006 and 29.01.2014, the Director, Science and Technology Department, Government of Bihar issued the order dated 10.03.2014 to the Accountant General, Bihar for issuance of salary slips in favour of the petitioners of that writ petition after calculating the annual increment with effect from 09.12.1986. Sri Sanat Kumar Pandey, Sri Manoj Kumar Singh and Sri Bindeshwari Jha were posted in the Sate of Jharkhand and their services were given to the Stat of Jharkhand in cadre division. In view of the order of the Court, the persons whose services were terminated with effect from 31.01.1991 got their services confirmed and regularized with effect from 09.12.1986 with all annual increment from the said date. Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel by way of stressing on this fact and particularly referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Patna High Court as well as in view of the order in review petition submits that the petitioners are on the same footing and their services need to be regularized with effect from 09.12.1986. He further submits that one Baleshwar Sharma who was not given the benefit and was working as a Laboratory Assistant in the Magadh Engineering College, Gaya moved before the Patna High Court in CWJC No.17739 of 2014 praying for confirming and regularizing with effect from 09.12.1986. The said writ petition was also allowed in terms of the earlier order dated 25.04.2018 passed in CWJC No.17739 of 2014. The petitioner nos.3 and 4 are serving on Class-IV post. The petitioner no.1 retired after attaining the age of superannuation from Government Polytechnic, Adityapur. The petitioner no.2 is posted as Laboratory Assistant in Government Polytechnic, Bhaga [BIT Sindri Campus], Dhanbad. The petitioners have filed the representation before the authorities for giving the benefit with effect from 09.12.1986.

(3.) Mr. Rahul Saboo, the learned S.C.-I submitted that in the State of Jharkhand the petitioners are working under the Jharkhand cadre since cadre division as such, the State of Jharkhand after receiving the aforesaid regularisation order of State of Bihar, the order for regularizing the services of such employees including the petitioners was issued vide order dated 11.02.2008 with effect from 31.01.1991. He further submitted that the Jharkhand has regularized the services of the petitioners consequent upn the regularization order of the State of Bihar dated 11.04.2007 with effect from 31.01.1991 and the claim of the petitioner to give effect of that order with effect from 09.12.1986 is not tenable.