SATYANARAYAN ROY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY order dated 30.1.2002, as contained at Annexure 5 to the writ petition the Regional Director, Animal Husbandry, while recording that one Dr. Kedar Prasad Pandey was going to superannuate on 31.1.2002, directed that the petitioner, who was the senior -most officer and was functioning as Sub -Divisional Animal Husbandry Officer, Latehar, would function as District Animal Husbandry Officer in addition to his own duties till further orders. Subsequently, however, by order dated 31.1.2002, the Secretary to the Department of Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, passed a contrary order and directed the said superannuating officer to hand over the charge to the Respondent No. 5 (Kaiadhar Prasad) instead to the petitioner.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that he being the senior to the Respondent No. 5 and his seniority having already been recorded vide Annexure 5, should not have been ignored and officers who are retiring/superannuating should, therefore, have been directed to hand over charge to him and not to the Respondent No. 5.

(3.) ACCORDING to the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4, the petitioner is no doubt at serial Number 888 amongst the Animal Husbandry Services Class 2 Cadre and according to his seniority he had been transferred from his basic post to the 1st stage promotional post as Sub Divisional Animal Husbandry Officer while the Respondent No. 5 has also been transferred from the post of Block Animal Husbandry Officer, Chandil, to the post of a Key Village Officer, Daltongunjon 18 -10 -2001. According to them the Respondent No. 5 has been authorised to work as District Animal Husbandry Officer but it is not a case of promotion to the higher post. On the contrary it is simply a direction to work as District Animal Husbandry Officer in his own pay -scale as a 'stop gap arrangement'.