Shiveshwar Dayal Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arasind Nath Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.P.Singh GA8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 5 01-03-2013 Petitioner no. 1 to 4 are B.A. trained teachers. Petitioner Patna High Court CWJC No.428 of 2011 (5) dt.01-03-2013 no.1 was appointed on 10.2.1982 and is posted at Primary school Dumari, district Bhabhua. Petitioner no.2 was appointed on

5.3.1975 and is posted at Municipality Middle school, Bhabhua. Petitioner no.3 was appointed on 5.11.1976 and is posted at Middle School, Beur, Chainpur. Petitioner no.4 was appointed on

12.1.1974 and he is posted at Middle School, Sirasi, Chainpur, Bhabhua. Petitioner no.5 to 10 are B.A. trained teacher. Petitioner no.5 was appointed on 9.11.1974 and is posted at Under Primary School, Dewahalia, Ramgarh, Kaimur. Petitioner no.6 was appointed on 16.12.1980 and posted at Middle School, Bhabhua Rampur. Petitioner no.7 was appointed on 10.11.1976 and is posted at Utrakramit Middle School, Dewahalia, Ramgarh. Petitioner no.8 was appointed on 10.11.1986 and is posted at Pardanasi Utkramit Middle School, Beur. Petitioner no.9 was appointed on 6.11.1977 and is posted at Urdu Primary School, Beur. Petitioner no.10 was appointed on 21.6.1976 and is posted at Urdu Makhatab, Bari Takia, Chainpur. Petitioner no.11 was appointed on 3.11.1977 and is posted at Utkramit Urdu Middle School, Chainpur. Petitioner no.12 was appointed on 22.3.1980 and he is posted at Utkramit Middle School, Samahuta, Mohania. Petitioner no.13 was appointed on 16.8.1978 and is posted at Utkramit Middle School, Mohania. Patna High Court CWJC No.428 of 2011 (5) dt.01-03-2013 Petitioners are aggrieved by the gradation/seniority list prepared by the District Establishment Education Committee held on 31.11.2009 which was approved by the District Magistrate, Kaimur. A copy of the decision is contained in Annexure 1 series. The petitioners have annexed the chart which contains the gradation/seniority list prepared by the respondents. Petitioners have tried to show from the gradation list that the teachers who were juniors and appointed later, have been placed higher in the gradation list from which promotion to the post of Head master is being made. The petitioners state that the seniority list has been prepared in violation of the 1993 Promotion Rules, particularly Rule 8. By way of illustration, petitioners submit that whereas he has been shown at Serial no. 49, his juniors find place at Serial no. 12, 35, 36, 37, 38 & 39. Similarly, petitioner no.3 was appointed on 5.11.1976 but has been shown at Serial no. 106. It is stated that 86 teachers are junior to him (petitioner no.3) but they have been shown senior to him. In the same way, petitioner no.11 was appointed on 21.6.1976 and is shown at Serial no. 36. About 26 teachers are junior to him (petitioner no.11) but they have been shown senior in the gradation/seniority list. The petitioners submit that they have even filed Patna High Court CWJC No.428 of 2011 (5) dt.01-03-2013 representations which not been considered. Representations of the petitioners are contained as Annexure 2 to the writ petition. Counter affidavit has been filed by the State. It appears that the respondents have not addressed the questions which are germane for the decision of the issue in question, rather they have taken a technical plea that the teachers who have been placed higher in seniority list have not been made parties to the writ petition. It prima facie appears from the gradation list that the petitioners have been shown below the persons who were junior to them. The petitioners would file representations afresh before the Secretary, Human Resource Department, Bihar, Patna (respondent no.1), who will pass appropriate orders in light of the promotion rules within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order. If after consideration it is found that the petitioners have incorrectly been placed in the gradation list, respondent no.1 would direct the authorities to restore their seniority in the gradation list so that they may not be prejudiced in matter of promotion to the post of Headmaster. It is submitted that the petitioners submit that petitioners nos. 2,5 and 11 have already retired. They would also be entitled Patna High Court CWJC No.428 of 2011 (5) dt.01-03-2013 to due admissible benefits if found that they have suffered on account of mistake in preparation of gradation list. The State is obliged to deposit requisite cost in terms of earlier orders. The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J)