Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1383 (JHR)

Arjun Hembram v. State of Jharkhand

2009-11-06

AMARESHWAR SAHAY

body2009
JUDGMENT: Heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their consent this writ application is being disposed of at this stage itself. The petitioner, who is a member of the scheduled tribe, was working as a peon grade IV employee, posted in the office of the Sub-divisional Officer, Godda, moved this Court earlier in C.W.J.C. No. 4276 of 2000 praying therein for direction to the respondents to consider his case for promotion/ appointment from Class IV post to Class III post with effect from 1992 i.e. the date on which the persons junior to him, were granted promotion to Class III post. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 20.12.2000 directing the petitioner to file a detail representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Godda, and his representation was directed to be disposed of by a reasoned order within a period of one month from the date of filing of such representation. It appears that pursuant to the aforesaid order of this Court an order as contained in Annexure-10 dated 19.3.2001 has been passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Godda, whereby the Deputy Commissioner has held that at present he cannot make any appointment on grade III post and, therefore, after placing all the facts, necessary guideline be sought for from the Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi and thereafter a decision be taken in the matter, Thereafter the petitioner moved this Court in the present writ application praying for direction to the respondents to consider his case for promotion with effect from 1992 mainly on the ground that though he is fulfilling all the requisite qualification and experience, but ignoring his claim, the person junior to him has been promoted/ appointed to Class III post from Class IV post, but the case of the petitioner has not been considered. In the writ petition the petitioner cited the case of one Lalit Thakur, who is said to be junior to the petitioner, has been promoted/ appointed to Class III post by issue of an order dated 17.3.1992 as contained in Annexure-4 to the writ petition. From the order as contained in Annexure-10 dated 19.3.2001 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Godda, it appears that pursuant to the resolution no. From the order as contained in Annexure-10 dated 19.3.2001 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Godda, it appears that pursuant to the resolution no. 2215 dated 11.2.1985 the matter for filling up 25 posts of the total vacancy in grade III post from grade IV employees in the Collect orate was considered and on consideration of the same in a meeting a resolution was taken to promote 6 peons grade IV employees to grade III posts, but the case of the petitioner was not considered in the said meeting. Now after issue of letter/ circular dated 7.2.2000 for appointment to grade III posts a decision has been taken that 50% of the total post has to be filled up from grade IV employees and 50% of the post has to be filled up by direct recruitment. It is not disputed that though the petitioner was eligible to be appointed/ promoted to grade III post having requisite qualification and experience, but his case for promotion to grade III post was not considered, rather it is stated that service book of the petitioner was not sent. But as it appears from the documents annexed with the writ petition that the service book of the petitioner was forwarded vide letter no. 135 dated 29.5.1992 for promotion to Class III post and even the Sub-Divisional Officer, Godda, by his letter dated 7.9.1994 sent the name of the petitioner with others for consideration of his case for promotion to Class III post. It is also not disputed that one Lalit Thakur , who was junior to the petitioner in service, was promoted to grade III post. The circular of 6.12.1995 issued by the Government of Jharkhand speaks about filling of the posts of grade III by the Bihar Public Service Commission after taking examination, cannot be made applicable to the case of the petitioner, since it was issued in the year 1995, whereas the petitioner was entitled to be considered for promotion/ appointment to Class III post in the year 1992 itself and in fact one junior person to the petitioner in service, namely, Lalit Thakur was promoted/ appointed to Class III post. Therefore, in my view, the petitioner is entitled to be considered for promotion to Class III post. Accordingly, This writ petition is allowed. Therefore, in my view, the petitioner is entitled to be considered for promotion to Class III post. Accordingly, This writ petition is allowed. The order as contained in Annexure-10 dated 19.3.2001 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Godda, is hereby quashed and the respondents are directed to take a decision in the matter and pass an appropriate order within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid observations and directions this writ application stands disposed of.