BAIJ NATH SETH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioners impugned advertisement dated 1st November 2004 issued by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) for appointment to the post of Deputy Registrar, Assistant Registrar and Controller of Examination through direct recruitment contending that it is against the statutes relating to 'General Conditions of Service of Employees of Ranchi University' as approved by the Chancellor being letter no.5270 GS(I) dated 18th November 1980. They had also sought quashing of the advertisement notice dated 18th December 2004 for holding interview on 28th, 29th and 30th December 2004. They also sought a direction upon the respondents to fill up these posts through promotion after considering the case of the petitioners as per the prevalent statute dated 18th November 1980 and restraint upon the respondents from acting in pursuance of any other proposed statute or so-called statute not framed in accordance with law as per the provisions of the Jharkhand State Universities Act, 2000. They sought restraint upon the respondent-Commission from undertaking interview. Initially the Statute for Qualification and Pay Scale for the Post of Officers to be filled up by the University by direct recruitment as notified by letter no.624 dated 18th May 2004 was not under-challenge, though the impugned advertisement was issued under the said statute. The prayer of the petitioners to challenge the statute of 2004 was allowed only on 29th January 2015. In the meantime, they had also sought challenge to the appointment of the private respondents who were appointed pursuant to the impugned advertisement vide notification dated 31st March 2005. Such an amendment was allowed by an order dated 2nd July 2012.

(3.) As per the case of the petitioners, petitioner no.1 was serving under the respondent University since 1981 and had been promoted to the post of Estate Officer. Petitioner no.2 was appointed as Welfare Officer in the year 1981 and had been in service all along on the said post since his appointment. Petitioner no.3 was appointed as a Statistical Assistant on 1st April 1983 and had thereafter been promoted in 1989 to the post of Office Superintendent on which post he was continuing at the time of filing of this writ petition. Petitioners no. 1 and 2 contended that they deserved to be promoted on the post of Deputy Registrar while petitioner no.3 contended that he deserved to be promoted to the post of Assistant Registrar in the respondent-University. According to them, the statute dated 18th November 1980 was framed under the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 as notified by the Chancellor which made provisions for appointment to the post of officers of the University. As per Clause-3 Sub-clause (5) in respect of officers other than Registrar, Inspector of Colleges and Finance Officer, who were to be appointed through open advertisement, the Vice-Chancellor was to seek approval of the Chancellor to decide whether other posts were to be filled up by promotion or by direct recruitment.