MURARI BHAGAT Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for interim order of stay of implementation/operation of the notification dated 07.01.2016 and also for direction upon the respondents to post the petitioner against the sanctioned post, not below the post held by the persons junior to him. Heard Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H.K. Mehta, learned AAG for the respondents -State.

(2.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that vide notification dated 07.01.2016 (Annexure 17), the petitioner has been posted in the Urban Development Department, Jharkhand for posting on the post of Superintending Engineer whereas persons at serial Nos. 1 and 2, who are junior to him, have been given additional charge of Chief Engineer apart from posting on the post of Superintending Engineer. However, pursuant thereto the petitioner submitted his joining in the Urban Development Department on 11.01.2016 with a request to pass appropriate order of posting on the post equivalent to his immediate junior. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner drawing attention of the Court to Appendix 10 of Memo No. 7556(S) dated 03.11.2015 (Annexure 18), wherein it has been mentioned that there is no sanctioned post of Superintending Engineer in the Urban Development Department submitted that still the services of the petitioner has been placed as Superintending Engineer in the said department. Learned senior counsel further submitted that in view of memo dated 25.01.2006 issued by the Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department of the Government of Jharkhand even in the case of making in -charge arrangement of higher posts, seniority and reservations etc. must be considered. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in view of letter dated 19.12.2006 of the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand even for me purpose of giving ad hoc higher post seniority, reservation etc. are to be followed otherwise such posting violating the seniority and reservation etc. shall be treated to be invalid.

(3.) Confining his prayer, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in view of the above circulars and departmental rules, the grievances of me petitioner, as raised in this interlocutory application, would be redressed.