Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 164 (JHR)

Chittaranjan Chaturvedi v. State Of Bihar

2004-02-13

AMARESHWAR SAHAY

body2004
JUDGMENT Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. The petitioner, in this writ application has prayed for quashing of Notification as contained in Annexure- 5 dated 15.1.1996, issued by the Government of Bihar, Department of Mines and Geology, by which. Indra Deo Paswan, District Mining Officer was promoted to the post of Deputy Director (Mines) with retrospective effect from 21.6.1993, whereas the petitioner was promoted as Deputy Director (Mines) with effect from 1.2.1994. The further prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is to quash the Notification dated 5.3.1995 issued by the Government of Bihar, whereby the respondent No. 4, Indra Deo Paswan was made Additional Director (Mines) on officiating basis. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he was promoted to the post of District Mining Officer on 29.1.1972, whereas the respondent No. 4 was appointed as District Mining Officer on 21.6.1983. It is said that the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 4, Indra Deo Paswan were made the Deputy Director of Mines vide Notification dated 20.6.1986 as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ application. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that by issue of Annexure-5 i.e. the Notification dated 15.1.1996, the respondent No. 4, who was much junior to the petitioner, was promoted to the post of Deputy Director on regular basis as Deputy Director of Mines, with effect from 21.6.1993, whereas the petitioner being the senior most was promoted on regular basis to the post of Deputy Director (Mines) with effect from 1.2.1994, which was absolutely illegal. It is stated that though the petitioner represented the matter raising his objection and grievance but nothing was done and subsequently by issue of Annexure-7, the Notification dated 5.3.1997, the respondent No. 4 has illegally been made Deputy Director (Mines). 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Kalyan Roy stated that during the pendency of this application, the petitioner has already superannuated and, therefore, now he is confining his prayer to give the benefit of promotion to the petitioner to the post of Deputy Director of Mines at least from the date, from which, the respondent No. 4 was given promotion i.e. with effect from 21.6.1993 and he be given all consequential monetary benefits. 5. 5. The claim of the petitioner has been challenged by the respondents on the ground that no doubt, by Notification dated 20.6.1986, the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 4 were authorized to works as Deputy Director (Mines) but the same was done because of the vacancies caused by deputation of two Deputy Director B.B, Lal and D.P. Asthana, which was purely a stop arrangement. 6. It is further stated that proposed for officiating promotion of the petitioner and respondent No. 4 to the post of Deputy Director (Mines) was sent to Bihar Public Service Commission in the year 1990 but the meanwhile Shri Meghnath Ram Acting Deputy Director (Mines) was reinstated in his post and thus one post of Deputy Director (Mines) remained vacant and since the respondent No. 4 had not completed 10 years of prescribed Service as District Mining Officer for his promotion to the post of Deputy Director (Mines) and, therefore, the proposal of respondent No. 4 for officiating the promotion was withdrawn vide letter dated 24.4.1991 and then the Departmental Committee found the petitioner fit for promotion to the post of Deputy Director (Mines). The recommendation for the same was sent to the Cabinet Secretariat for approval with a condition that the post will be carried forward for three years for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe category as the said post was reserved for Scheduled Caste category. The relevant file was sent to the Personnel Department for their opinion in the matter but it could not be finalised for a long period. In the meantime, the process for promotion of respondent No. 4 was initiated afresh and the proposal for regular promotion to the post of Deputy Director (Mines) was again sent to the Bihar Public Service Commission for recommendation to the Departmental Promotion Committee. Subsequently the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 4 were recommended for promotion by the Departmental Promotion Committee. It is submitted that as per the letter No. 104 dated 9.1.1992 of the Personnel Department, Government of Bihar, the proposal of promotion of the petitioner with effect from, 1.2.1994 i.e. the date on which the post fell vacant and so far as the respondent No. 4 was concerned, with effect from 21.6.1993 i.e. from the date on date of which he completed ten years of service was approved by the Council of Ministers. Thereafter, the impugned Notification as contained in Annexure-5 was issued and, as such, there was no illegality on it and the claim of the petitioner to promote him at least from the date on which, the respondent No. 4 has been given promotion is not justified. 7. From the pleading of the parties as well as from the documents annexed therein, it appears that the respondent No. 4 was granted promotion to the post of Deputy Director (Mines) against a post which was reserved for the Scheduled Caste from the date, he completed the minimum period of 10 years of service as District Mining Officer. 8. The petitioner being a member of General category was not entitled to be promoted on the post, reserved for Scheduled Castes candidates nor he being a member of General category can challenge the promotion of the respondent No. 4 made against a post for reserved category of Schedule Caste. 9. In view of my finding and discussion above, the claim of the petitioner, that he should also be given promotion with effect from the date i.e. 21.6.1993, on which the respondent No. 4 was promoted to the post of Deputy Director of Mines is not at all tenable and, therefore, I find no merit in this writ application. Accordingly, this application is dismissed but without any costs.