Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 805 (JHR)

Alok Kumar v. State of Jharkhand

2011-08-24

D.N.PATEL

body2011
JUDGMENT: D.N.Patel, J. 1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for getting the benefit under Assured Career Progression Scheme, on the ground that he was initially appointed in the year, 1991 as Assistant Central Intelligence Officer whereas the respondent authorities are considering his appointment on the post of Deputy Collector from 15/16th October, 2000 and the services, rendered by the petitioner as Assistant Central Intelligence Officer earlier, is not being calculated for grant of the benefit under Assured Career Progression Scheme. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Central Intelligence Officer in the year, 1991 with the erstwhile State of Bihar. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for his selection in State Administrative Services, in pursuance of a public advertisement, issued by the Bihar Public Service Commission on 31st December, 1997 and appeared in the Combined Competitive Examination, written as well as oral, and got selected for a new post of Deputy Collector. Thereafter, the petitioner resigned from the earlier post on 15th October, 2000 and took charge of the new post i.e. Deputy Collector on the very same day. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as the petitioner had served as Assistant Central Intelligence Officer from 1991 onwards, his earlier services have been considered for pensionary benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon Annexure 11 and 12 to the memo of petition, has submitted that for pensionary benefits, his earlier services from 1991 to 15/16th October, 2000 have been calculated by Annexure 11. Likewise, by Annexure 12, continuity of services have been considered and his pay has been protected and, therefore, now for grant of the benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme also, the respondents ought to have calculated his services from 1991 onwards. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner was appointed in the year, 1991 as Assistant Central Intelligence Officer and, thereafter, he appeared in a Combined Competitive Examination, in pursuance of a public advertisement, in the year, 1997 and subsequently, upon his selection, he has been appointed for the post of Deputy Collector. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner was appointed in the year, 1991 as Assistant Central Intelligence Officer and, thereafter, he appeared in a Combined Competitive Examination, in pursuance of a public advertisement, in the year, 1997 and subsequently, upon his selection, he has been appointed for the post of Deputy Collector. The post of Deputy Collector, being a fresh and new service, the petitioner resigned from his earlier post of Assistant Central Intelligence Officer and thereafter, the present petitioner has been appointed as Deputy Collector with effect from 15/16th October, 2000 and, therefore, for grant of the benefit under Assured Career Progression Scheme, his services can only be considered with effect from 15/16th October, 2000, because the subsequent post is a fresh and new post, upon which the petitioner is selected through Combined Competitive Examination. The earlier services, rendered by the petitioner as Assistant Central Intelligence Officer, has been considered vide Annexure 11 and 12 to the memo of petition, only for the purposes of pensionary benefit and/or continuity in service and pay protection. However, the benefit under Assured Career Progression Scheme cannot be given to the petitioner, considering the services, rendered by him from the year, 1991 onwards and, as such, no error has been committed by the respondents in considering the services of the petitioner on the new post of Deputy Collector from 15/16th October, 2000. 4. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme, calculating his services from 1991 onwards, mainly for the following facts and reasons: (i) The petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Central Intelligence Officer on and from 19.9.1991 and since thereafter, he was continuing on the said post. During this period, there was a public advertisement on 31st December, 1997 by the Bihar Public Service Commission for the 42nd Combined Competitive Examination. The petitioner preferred application for appearing at the said Combined Competitive Examination. (ii) It further appears from the facts of the case that the petitioner has cleared written as well as oral examinations and was selected for the post of Deputy Collector and was appointed as such, on 15/16th October, 2000, which is altogether a new post. The petitioner preferred application for appearing at the said Combined Competitive Examination. (ii) It further appears from the facts of the case that the petitioner has cleared written as well as oral examinations and was selected for the post of Deputy Collector and was appointed as such, on 15/16th October, 2000, which is altogether a new post. (iii) Thereafter, the petitioner resigned from the post of Assistant Central Intelligence Officer on 15/16th October, 2000 and joined the new post of Deputy Collector on the very same day, but, the fact remains that the new post of Deputy Collector is altogether another post, for which a competitive examination was held by the Bihar State Public Service Commission and, therefore, the petitioner born in the post of Deputy Collector on and from 15/16th October, 2000 and, therefore, the benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme can only be given to the petitioner, by calculating his services only with effect from 15/16th October, 2000 . (iv) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the basis of Annexure 11 and 12 to the memo of petition, his earlier services from 9.9.1991 to 15th October, 2000 have been calculated for the pensionary benefit and for such other benefits and, thus, his services for the aforesaid period should also be calculated for grant of benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme. This is a misconception of law in the mind of the petitioner. Grant of benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme is altogether another thing and that is why it is not referred in Annexure 11 and 12. The benefit under Assured Career Progression Scheme is generally granted to an incumbent, who has not been given promotion within the span of 12 years of service. (v) The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the earlier services, rendered by him from 1991 to 15/16th October, 2000 should be calculated for grant of the benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme on the post of Deputy Collector. If this argument is accepted, then just within two or three years, the petitioner will become entitled to get benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme on a new post of Deputy Collector. This is not permissible in the eyes of law. If this argument is accepted, then just within two or three years, the petitioner will become entitled to get benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme on a new post of Deputy Collector. This is not permissible in the eyes of law. There may be a continuation of service for some other benefits, as per Annexure 11 and 12, but, it cannot be considered for grant of benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme. The earlier post of Assistant Central Intelligence Officer is altogether another post than that of the Deputy Collector, for which the petitioner has appeared through Public Service Commission in a competitive examination and upon qualifying in the written as well as oral test, the petitioner has been appointed on altogether a new post of Deputy Collector. Therefore, for grant of benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme, the earlier services, rendered by the petitioner from 9.9.1991 to 15/16th October, 2000 has rightly been not calculated by the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that even on this post, the benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme has not been given to the petitioner. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted such benefit will be given to the petitioner, calculating his services from 15/16th October, 2000 on the post of Deputy Collector and this exercise will be completed by the respondents within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order of this Court and the same will be given in accordance with law, rules, regulations, policies and enforceable government orders, applicable to the petitioner. 7. In view of the aforesaid submission, the petitioner will be entitled to get the benefits of Assured Career Progression Scheme on and from 15/16th October, 2000, calculating his services from 15/16th October, 2000, on the due post of Deputy Collector and the earlier services, rendered by the petitioner from 9.9.1991 till 15/16th October, 2000 shall not be taken into consideration for grant of benefit under Assured Career Progression Scheme. Accordingly, no error has been committed by the respondent-State in excluding this period of service from 9.9.1991 till 15/16th October, 2000, as stated herein above and it is true that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit under Assured Career Progression Scheme on the post of Deputy Collector on and from 15/16th October, 2000. Accordingly, no error has been committed by the respondent-State in excluding this period of service from 9.9.1991 till 15/16th October, 2000, as stated herein above and it is true that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit under Assured Career Progression Scheme on the post of Deputy Collector on and from 15/16th October, 2000. This benefit will be given to the petitioner by the respondent-State within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order of this Court, in accordance with law, rules, regulations, policies and enforceable government orders, applicable to the petitioner. 8. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed, with the aforesaid directions.