LAKHAN LAL PANDEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this application the petitioner has prayed for issuance of direction to the respondents to promote the petitioner to Grade -3 post from retrospective effect, i.e. from the date his juniors were promoted to the said post.

(2.) THE petitioner being appointed as a Chaukidar was working as such in the Department of Animal Husbandry of the State Government. The post of Chaukidar is a Grade -IV post. The case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the office memo No. 397 dated 03/05/1990, issued by the Government of Bihar, a list of Grade -IV employees working in the Animal Husbandry Department was prepared, who were having the qualification of matriculation or above for the purpose of promoting them to the post of Grade -III. In the said list the name of the petitioner stand at Sl. No. 35. The copy of the list has been annexed as Annexure -3 to the writ application.

(3.) THE State of Bihar by filing counter affidavit has controverted the stand taken by the petitioner in the writ application. It is stated that the Association of Grade -IV employees moved before the Regional Director to grant promotion to the post of Clerk/ Karamchari, i.e. from Grade -IV to Grade -III on the basis of seniority -cum -eligibility. The matter was referred to the Director, Animal Husbandry, Patna, who by his letter directed all the Regional Directors to take interview of the employee, who is eligible and has qualification of typing etc. Consequently, all those Grade -IV employees, who were eligible, were noticed to appear on 09/04/1991 for interview and test in the office of the Regional Director. Accordingly, 15 employees including the petitioner participated in the typing test but as stated the petitioner could not type even more than 12 words per minute and, therefore, on the basis of very poor performance of the petitioner, he was not considered for promotion to the post of Grade -III. It is stated that it is wrong to say that on the basis of pick and chose, the other persons, named above, were promoted to Grade -III. It is stated that the promotion was given to those persons who were senior or similarly situated to the petitioner on the ground of seniority and ability/eligibility of typing, who had succeeded in the test of typing. These facts stated in the counter affidavit have not been controverted by the petitioner.