The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 03 of 2023 1. Suman Tigga, Aged about 41 years, wife of Sri Sushil Kumar Minz, Resident of Mohalla/Village Saparom, P.O. Saparom, P.S. Nagri, District-Ranchi (Pin-835303). 2. Amrita Khalkho, Aged about 42 years, wife of Amit Bando, Resident of Village/Mohalla Gitilpiri, P.O. Hatia, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District-Ranchi (Pin-834003). 3. Dilip Kumar Shaw, Aged about 46 years, son of Sunil Saw, Resident of Mohalla/Village Sarubera, P.O. Sarubera, P.S. Mandu, District-Ramgarh (Pin-829134) 4. Md. Muslim Ansari, Aged about 52 years, son of late Taslim Ansari, Resident of Village/Mohalla Amboa Toli, P.O. & P.S. Mahuadar, District-Latehar (Pin-822119). 5. Rakesh Ranjan, Aged about 47 years, son of late Tripurari Prasad, Resident of Mohalla. Village Sidhi Niwas, Baksidih Road, P.O. Giridih, P.S. Giridih Sadar, District-Ranchi (Pin-815301). 6. Pandey Sanjay Nath Ray, Aged about 45 years, son of late Pandey S.N.Roy, Resident of Mohalla/Village Edalhatu, Uppertola, P.O.Ranchi University, P.S. Bariatu, District - Ranchi (Pin- 834008). 7. Santosh Kumar, Aged about 45 years, son of late Parmeshwar Lal, Resident of Mohalla/Village Kendua, P.O. G.B. Kendua, P.S. Sirdala, District-Nawada (Pin-805122).
Legal Reasoning
8. Sudhir Kumar, Aged about 39 years, son of Sri Satyndra Kumar Singh, Resident of Mohalla/Village Basuhar, P.O. Basuhar, P.S. Punpun, District-Patna (Pin-804453). 9. Dilip Kumar Singh, Aged about 47 years, son of Ram Krit Singh Resident of Mohalla/Village Upper Dhaura, P.O. Bhurkunda Bazar, P.S. Patratu, District-Ramgarh (Pin-829106). 10. Suresh Kumar, Aged about 45 years, son of late Sadanand Mahto, Resident of Mohalla/Village Sataki, P.O. Sataki, P.S. Rahe, District-Ranchi (Pin-835204). 11. Manish Kumar, Aged about 46 years, son of Rama Kant Lal, Resident of 243 Kali Pahari, Dakshin, near Durga Sthan, Professors Colony, Kamaliya, Maithon Dam, P.O. & P.S. Maithon Dam, District-Dhanbad (Pin-826207). … … Petitioners Versus 1. State of Jharkhand through its Principal Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Cooperative Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having office at Nepal House, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi. 2. Principal Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Cooperative Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having office at Nepal House, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District- Ranchi 3. Registrar, Cooperative Society, Pashupalan Bhawan, Khunti Road, Hesag, Hatia, P.O. & P.S. Hatia, District-Ranchi. . … Respondents … --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY For the Petitioners --- : Mr. Sameer Saurabh, Advocate 2 For the Respondents : Mr. Shrabhil Ahmed, AC to SC Mines I --- 05/05.02.2024 The learned counsels for the parties are present. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following relief: “That in this writ petition, the petitioners above named respectfully pray before this Hon'ble court for issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents particularly the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to immediately convene the meeting of departmental promotion committee and consider the case of the petitioners for promotion on the post of Sub. Divisional Audit Officer, Co-operative Societies. AND/OR For further issuance of any appropriate consequential order(s)/direction (s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners were appointed on the post of Senior Audit Officer on the recommendation of Jharkhand Public Service Commission pursuant to competitive examination conducted in terms of Advertisement No.16/2008 and after completion of the required training, they were all working on the post of Senior Audit Officer in the year 2011. The learned counsel submits that upon completion of 5 years, there case was due for consideration for promotion but the same has not been considered so far, which has compelled the petitioners to move this writ application. The learned counsel has also submitted that though a counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 3 stating that Departmental Promotion Committee will be held but neither any date nor any time frame has been mentioned therein. 4. The learned counsel has also referred to Gazette Notification of the State of Jharkhand dated 04.04.2014 and has referred to Clause (i) thereof to submit that the various authorities of the State are duty bound to conduct meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee twice a year. The learned counsel has submitted that in spite of taking a policy decision to that effect, the respondents are not following the same and the counter-affidavit is totally vague in connection with the holding of meeting of Department Promotion Committee and in this background, he submits that some time frame may be given so that legitimate right of the petitioners for consideration of their cases for promotion be not defeated. 3 5. The learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the respondents are taking steps but he is completely clueless as to why the decision of the State Government as contained in Notification dated 04.04.2014 is not being followed by the State. The learned counsel submits that on account of non-grant of promotion, ACP and MACP are being provided to the petitioners. However, it is not in dispute that ACP and MACP by themselves are not substitute of promotion. He has submitted that the post to be filled up through promotion has already been earmarked. 6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the materials brought on record, it appears that the petitioners have been working on the post of Senior Audit Officer and their promotion is due for quite some time. The respondents have not acted in terms of their own policy decision as contained in clause (i) of the Notification dated 04.04.2014. Clause (i) is quoted as under: “(i) राज्य के विभिन्न वििागों के ्ቚशासननक ननयं्ቔणाधीन सिी सेिाओं/संिगों में ्ቚोन्ननि के ररक्ि पदों के विरुद्ध अर्हिा ्ቚाप्ि कभमहयों के ्ቚोन्ननि की त्िररि कारहिाई की जाय। इसके भिए िर्ह में कम से कम दो बार वििागीय ्ቚोन्ननि सभमनि की बैठक आिश्य आर्ूि की जाय।” As per the counter-affidavit, the respondent nos.1 to 3 have 7. made, inter alia, following statements in paragraph nos.7, 8 and 12 as under: 7. That it is stated and submitted that vide Department letter 1832 dated 11-09-2007 thirty five post of Sub-Divisional Audit officers had been identified in the state of Jharkhand. Out of these thirty five posts, thirty posts are at present vacant. 8. That it is stated and submitted that process of giving the benefit of promotion to Senior Audit Officers in the abovementioned thirty vacant posts of Sub-Division Audit officers is currently underway. 12. That it is humbly stated that in view of the submission, the writ petition may be disposed as the process of promotion is under process and the claim of petitioners will be considered as per their own individual merit by the DPC in accordance with law.” 8. Thus, the entitlement of the petitioners for consideration in the Departmental Promotion Committee, if they are otherwise entitled upon verification of their records, is not in dispute. However, the reasons for keeping the matter regarding their promotion pending has not been pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents. 9. In view of the fact that the respondents have acted against their own policy, this Court is of the considered view that appropriate direction is required to be issued so that the respondents would 4 expedite the matter regarding consideration of promotion of the petitioners by conducting departmental promotion meeting. 10. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent no.2 to promptly conduct the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee so that the claim of promotion of all eligible candidates including the petitioners, in case there is no other legal impediment, be considered and the meeting be convened within the period of three months from the date of communication of this order. This Court has not gone into the entitlement of the petitioners for promotion and it is observed that their claims will be subject to applicable rules guidelines etc. 11. Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands closed. Saurav/ (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)