Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 164 (PAT)

Khwaja Ghulam Rashool v. State Of Bihar

2005-02-15

NARAYAN ROY

body2005
Judgment Narayan Roy, J. 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The writ petitioner is desirous of issuance of direction upon the respondents to grant him junior selection grade and senior selection grade scales with effect from 1.4.1988 and 1.2.1992, respectively. 3. Precisely, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had become eligible for the junior selection grade scale with effect from 1.4.1988, but for the reasons best known to the authorities his claim was never considered nor due promotion was granted. 4. However, a plea has been taken by the respondents that since a departmental proceeding and a criminal case are pending against the petitioner, his claim would not be sustainable. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the matter pertaining to grant of junior selection grade and senior selection grade was placed before the authorities and the authorities vide decision dated 22.06.2001 withheld the promotion of the petitioner on the ground of departmental proceeding and criminal charges pending against him, whereas the same was made available to other persons junior to the petitioner. 6. In this context, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a criminal case was instituted against the petitioner in the year 1991 and a departmental proceeding was initiated against him in the year 1999, much after the right had accrued to the petitioner for grant of junior selection grade, and, therefore, the subsequent events could not have been taken into consideration while considering his claim for junior selection, grade scale. It is also submitted that in view of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Bank of India and Anr. V/s. Degal Suryanarayana, AIR 1999 SC 2407 , and also in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Nirmal Kumar V/s. State of Bihar and Ors., 2004 (1) BLJR 63 , even the sealed cover procedure will not apply for grant of promotion to the petitioner in the given facts and circumstances of the case. 7. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State. 8. However, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is being disposed of at this stage. 9. 7. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State. 8. However, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is being disposed of at this stage. 9. Admittedly, the claim of the petitioner for junior selection grade relates back to the year 1988 and at that time, neither there was any criminal case nor any departmental proceeding was pending against him. 10. The claim of the petitioner, in that view of the matter, was required to be considered by the authorities in accordance with law. 11. So far grant of senior selection grade scale with effect from 1.2.1992 is concerned, it appears that before this right had accrued to the petitioner a criminal case was instituted against him in the year 1991, and, therefore, that the subject to result of the criminal case and the departmental proceeding, which was initiated against him in the year 1999. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and for the reasons aforementioned, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of junior selection grade scale with effect from 1.4.1988 in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 13. With the direction/observation aforesaid this application is disposed of.