Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1752 (JHR)

Bijan Kumar Dutta v. State of Jharkhand

2017-10-09

PRAMATH PATNAIK

body2017
ORDER : 1. In the aforesaid writ petition, the petitioner has inter-alia prayed for quashing of the impugned order dated 28.10.2003 (Annexure-10) pertaining to the rejection on the claim of the petitioner for grant of B.A. Trained scale with effect from October, 1978 i.e. passing of the requisite qualification i.e. B.A. Trained scale or at least with effect from 06.03.1987 and petitioner has further prayed for promotion to the post of Head-master since similarly situated persons namely Surendra Mahto and Kano Kishore Mahto being junior to the petitioner have already been given B.A. Trained scale with effect from 1987 and also has been promoted to the post of Headmaster. 2. Mr. Deepak Kr. Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 28.10.2003 on the ground that the same has been passed not in right perspective because the petitioner has been subjected to hostile discrimination. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order vide Annexure-10 to the writ petition has been passed not in accordance with law the order passed in CWJC No. 3673 of 1997 (R) dated 30.06.2003. 3. Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents wherein it has been submitted that the rules governing service conditions of the teacher enumerated in letter dated 15.12.1976 vide Annexure-A to the counter-affidavit. Further revised guidelines to service conditions for appointment and promotion of the teachers have been issued which is annexed as Annexure-B to the counter-affidavit. It has further been submitted that bifurcation of the unified State of Bihar the State of Jharkhand adopted the Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rules, 1993 and in the year 2015 issued a resolution dated 14.12.2015 letter of the service promotion of the untrained teachers appointed in the year, 1987, 1988 and 1994 vide Annexure-D to the counter-affidavit. 4. Mr. Binod Singh, learned SC (L&C) for the respondents-State has justified the impugned order vide Annexure-10 to the writ petition and has submitted that the petitioner being a district cadre employee and because of reorganization of the district he has not been granted B.A. Trained scale though junior to the petitioner Surendra Mahto has been granted B.A. Trained scale with effect from 06.03.1987 as per Annexure-2 to the writ petition. 5. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the records, I am of the considered view that the petitioner's case requires for reconsideration by the respondents on the ground that the impugned order vide Annexure-10 though the seniority of the petitioner vis-a-vis Surendra Mahto is not disputed but for the reorganization of the district, he has been victim of discrimination. Moreover, Surendra Mahto has been granted the benefit of B.A. Trained scale with effect from 06.03.1987 so the petitioner is entitled to get the said scale at least with effect from 06.03.1987. It has also submitted at bar that during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has retired on attaining the age of superannuation in July, 2012. 6. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 28.10.2003 (Annexure-10) is hereby quashed and set aside and writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 4 to grant the scale of B.A. Trained Scale with effect from 06.03.1987 as has been granted to junior namely Surendra Mahto and considered the case of petitioner for promotion if comes within the zone in accordance with law. The aforesaid exercise can be completed within a period of 12 weeks from the date of communication/receipt of the order. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands allowed.