HARI NANDAN PRASAD VERMA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY Court Heard learned counsel for the parties. By the impugned order dated 18th May, 2001 (Annexure12) issued by the respondent no. 3, Chief Engineer, Multipurpose Project, Chandil Complex at Jamshedpur, the representation of the petitioner has been decided against him, whereunder he had sought grant of Super Time Selection Grade ahead of the private respondent.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner joined service on 8th January, 1973 as Junior Accounts Clerk, whereas respondent no. 5 joined on 4th April, 1972 as Senior Accounts Clerk. In the year 1980, the cadre of Junior Accounts Clerk and Senior Accounts Clerk were merged and thereafter, only one cadre of Accounts Clerk was in existence. There was a circular in existence at the relevant point of time, whereunder if a junior person in the cadre of accounts clerk passed the departmental accounts examination, and his senior in the same cadre did not do so for a period of next two years, the junior will be ranked senior to the senior person in the gradation list thereafter. According to the petitioner, he has passed the accounts examination on 10th January, 1982 whereas the respondent no.5 has passed the accounts examination in the month of June, 1984. By virtue of passing of the accounts examination, the petitioner ought to have been treated as senior to the respondent no. 5, as admittedly, the respondent no. 5 passed the said examination beyond two years period of passing of the examination by the petitioner, inter alia in terms of Rule 157(3)(J) of the Bihar Board's Miscellaneous Rules. However, in due course of time, the respondent no. 5 was granted promotion in the year 1986 to the junior selection grade w.e.f. 1977 and was senior selection grade in the year 1985. He has thereafter been granted super time selection grade in the year 1989. The petitioner, however, chose to press his grievance only after all these promotions were granted to the respondent no. 5 in the year 1986 w.e.f. 1977 & 1985 and subsequently in the year 1989 when he was granted super time selection grade by preferring a writ petition in the year 2001 being CWJC No. 1274 of 2001. By order dated 30th March, 2001, the writ petition was disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and to pass a reasoned order over the representation of the petitioner which was pending before the competent authority. Vide Annexure12 dated 18th March, 2001, the said representation was rejected by a reasoned order which is impugned herein. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on the face of it, the respondent no. 5 ought to have been ranked junior to the petitioner and therefore, he should not have been granted the super time scale which is a single post in the concerned cadre which ought to have been given to the petitioner, by virtue of his passing the accounts examination more than two years prior to respondent no.5 on 10th January, 1982.