Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 312 (PAT)

Vijay Kumar Pandey v. State Of Bihar

2001-04-06

NARAYAN ROY

body2001
Judgment Narayan Roy, J. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties in the main writ application and in the intervention application being Interlocutory Application No. 342 of 2001.: 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the intervention application in Interlocutory Application No. 342 of 2001 is allowed and the intervenors are allowed to be added as intervenor respondents. The intervention application shall not form part of this writ application. 3. The writ petitioner by this writ application has prayed for quashing the order dated 29-11-2000 pertaining to memo No. 2164, issued by respondent No. 3, as contained in Annexure 1, whereby and whereunder the promotion of the petitioner on the post of Science Graduate Teacher with effect from 11-4-1983 has been cancelled. A further has also been made to quash the follow-up order dated 5-12-2000, as contained in Annexure 2, whereby respondent No. 3 has directed respondent No. 4 to take action to adjust the amount already paid to the petitioner on account of promotion. 4. Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the orders impugned are violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution and are also violative of the principles of natural justice, as no opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner at any point of time before issuance of the orders impugned. It is further submitted that the petitioner was appointed on 15-5-1980 as Science Teacher and his qualification at the relevant time was B.Sc. (trained). The petitioner was given I.Sc. (trained) scale vide memo No. 1317-1507 dated 6-3-1981 with effect from 1-3-1981 and thereafter the petitioner was given B.Sc. (trained) scale with effect from 11-4-1983 and subsequently, the petitioner was promoted to the post of headmaster by resolution of the District Education Establishment Committee dated 19-12-1995 and consequently, benefits were given to him with effect from the date of issuance of the notification dated 30-12-1995. 5. Learned Counsel, therefore, submitted that the orders of promotion aforesaid given to the petitioner could not have been cancelled without giving him an opportunity of being heard. It is also argued by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was found eligible for B.Sc. (trained) scale and, accordingly, the scale was given to him and he was promoted to the post of headmaster; therefore, the orders impugned are highly arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction. 6. It is also argued by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was found eligible for B.Sc. (trained) scale and, accordingly, the scale was given to him and he was promoted to the post of headmaster; therefore, the orders impugned are highly arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction. 6. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 3, the District Superintendent of Education, wherein it is stated that the District Education Establishment Committee in its meeting dated 27-10-1992 had decided to cancel the promotion of the petitioner on the ground that the promotion granted to the petitioner was improper, as his name was placed at serial No. 92 of the seniority list and a number of senior teachers were left behind. It is further submitted that the decision of the Establishment Committee could not be communicated to the petitioner at that time, and, therefore, the Establishment Committee in its meeting held on 19-7-1999 stood by its earlier decision taken on 27-10-1992 and, in that view of the matter, the District Superintendent of Education, respondent No. 3, issued the orders, as contained in Annexure 1 and 2 to the writ petition. 7. Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the intervenors respondents, submitted that the petitioner has suppressed the material facts and has not come out with true picture of the case. Learned senior Counsel "submits that the so-called promotion of the petitioner in B.Sc. (trained) scale and the promotion on the post of headmaster have been cancelled by the District Education Establishment Committee held in its meeting dated 12-7-1999, which fact would be apparent from Annexures 1 and 2 to the writ petition. Learned Counsel further submits that the petitioner and a large number of persons, juniors to the intervenors were illegally promoted to B.Sc. (trained) scale and the intervenors, therefore, filed a writ application being Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11455 of 1995, along with other persons and in that writ application, the petitioner and other 22 in number were made respondents and a prayer was made to grant B.Sc. (trained) scale to the intervenors with effect from 11-4-1983 and promote them to the post headmaster with effect from 24-10-1995 and also to quash the illegal promotion given to several persons including the petitioner and the writ petitioner appeared in the writ application aforesaid and contested the same. (trained) scale to the intervenors with effect from 11-4-1983 and promote them to the post headmaster with effect from 24-10-1995 and also to quash the illegal promotion given to several persons including the petitioner and the writ petitioner appeared in the writ application aforesaid and contested the same. However, this Court vide order dated 17-3-1997, as contained in Annexure l/1 to the intervention application disposed of the matter, directing the writ petitioners to file a representation/appeal observing that the vacancies were to be filled in as per Government cireular Nos. 2060 dated 15-9-1981 2440 dated 18-12-1984 and Government Order No. 4557 dated 15-12-1976. It is further submitted by learned Counsel for the intervenors that as per the direction of this Court a detailed representation was filed before the Division Commissioner and the Divisional Commissioner by his order dated 15-4-1997 directed the intervenors to file a representation before the District Education Establishment Committee, which would examine matter afresh in the light of the orders passed by this Hon ble Court and pursuant thereof the cases of the intervenors and also the writ petitioner of this case and several others were examined by the District Education Establishment Committee as per the Rule/Circular of the Department and a list was prepared under the joint signature of the District Superintendent of Education and Deputy Superintendent of Education, in which the name of the present petitioner was placed at serial No. 7 and some of the intervenors were placed at serial Nos. 1 to 6 and some of them were also placed above the other persons, who were wrongly given the pay-scale of graduate trained teachers and promotion on the post of headmaster. The relevant decision of the District Education Establishment Committee has been enclosed with the intervention application, marked as Annexure I/3. Learned Counsel, therefore, submitted that the respondent State official be directed to Act as per the list, as contained in Annexure I/3. 8. The relevant decision of the District Education Establishment Committee has been enclosed with the intervention application, marked as Annexure I/3. Learned Counsel, therefore, submitted that the respondent State official be directed to Act as per the list, as contained in Annexure I/3. 8. Having heard Counsel for the parties and appreciating the submissions made at the bar, it appears that the grievance of the petitioner was earlier noticed by this Court vide Annexure l/1 to the intervention application, as he was one of the respondents and the authorities, pursuant to the direction of this Court, are seized with the matter and further actions are likely to be taken by them pursuant to the list prepared by them, as contained in Annexure l/3 to the intervention application. It also appears that the question of grant of promotion in B.Sc. (trained) scale and to the post of head master is under consideration with the authorities. In this view of the matter, it would not be appropriate for this Court in the given facts of the case to interfere with the matter. However, in the fitness of things, it would be desirable to direct the respondents to act as per the list, as contained in Annexure l/3 to the intervention application. 9. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the authorities to Act as per the list, as contained in annexure 1/3 to the intervention application and to take a decision in accordance with law so far the case of the petitioner vis-a-vis the case of others including the intervenors are concerned within a period of three months till the final decision is taken by the authorities, the orders impugned as contained in Annexures 1 and 2 to the writ application shall be kept in abeyance. 10. No order as to costs.