The High Court
Case Details
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 3856 of 2023 Ravindra Kumar … Petitioner V E R S U S 1. State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 2. Director of Health Services, Jharkhand 3. Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur. … Respondents 05/23.11.2023 2. CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S. N. PATHAK
Legal Reasoning
For the Petitioner :Mr. Sidharth Ranjan, Advocate For the State Ms. Shipra Shalini, Advocate :Mr. Divyan, AC to SC-IV Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the order dated 25.04.2023, issued vide memo no. 1256 (Annexure-4), under the signature of Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur whereby petitioner has been deputed/transferred from the post of Head Clerk in the office of Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, East Singhbhum to the office of the Sub-Division Hospital, Ghatshila, which amounts to reversion and posting without jurisdiction. Further prayer has been made to post the petitioner as Head Clerk as per his seniority and earlier recommendation. 3. As per the factual matrix, petitioner was appointed to the post of Clerk on 16.07.1993 and passed the Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination and also the Accounts papers. He is the senior most Upper Division Clerk in the office of the Civil Surgeon, Jamshedpur. It is further case of the petitioner that there are two sanctioned posts of the Head Clerk in the East Singhbhum District – one in the office of the Civil Surgeon, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur and another in the office of the Additional Civil Surgeon, East Singhbhum. Petitioner is the senior most Upper Division Clerk and one Yashwant Singh is the second in seniority posted therein. Till date no regular promotion on these two posts of Head Clerk has been done and the functions thereof are assigned on working arrangement basis. On the basis of seniority, petitioner was posted as Head Clerk in his own pay scale in the office of Civil Surgeon, Jamshedpur by order of the Director, Health Services, Jharkhand, issued vide Memo No. 1529 (23) dated 22.09.2018. Subsequently, the Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand, vide his Letter No. 279(23), dated 12.02.2020, directed the Civil Surgeon, East Singhbhum, RC 2 Jamshedpur to forward names of the clerks eligible for regular promotion on the post of Head Clerk. Accordingly, a Committee headed by the Civil Surgeon on 18.05.2020, recommended name of the petitioner and that of Yashwant Singh for grant of promotion on the two sanctioned posts of Head Clerk on the basis of seniority and fitness to the Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand. In view of recommendations, the Director-in-Chief, Health Services, vide order dated 30.05.2020, authorized the petitioner to discharge work of Head Clerk in the office of Civil Surgeon, East Singhbhum on work arrangement basis. Simultaneously, the other person namely Yashwant Singh was also directed to discharge work of Head Clerk in the office of Additional Chief Medical Officer. Subsequently, the seniority list of clerks consisting of Head Clerks, Upper Division Clerks and Lower Division Clerks posted in the office of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur was prepared wherein name of the petitioner figures at serial no. 1 and that of Jaswant Kumar at serial no. 2. On the basis of seniority, petitioner was assigned to work on the post of Head Clerk and was recommended for promotion on the said post. Petitioner, in view of recommendation, continued to discharge the function of head clerk to the satisfaction of the respondents. 4. It is specific case of the petitioner that all of a sudden, the Civil-Surgeon- cum-Chief Medical Officer, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, ordered to depute the petitioner in the Sub-Divisional Office, Ghatshila and Jaswant Kumar was directed to take full charge even from the petitioner working as Head Clerk. Thereafter, petitioner was relieved for joining the newly deputed post at Sub Divisional Office, Ghatshila. Petitioner aggrieved by the said posting and reversion from the post of Head Clerk to the Clerk, has knocked door of this Court. 5. Mr. Sidharth Ranjan, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Shipra Shalini, appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently argues that once petitioner has been recommended to work as a Head Clerk, as he was the seniormost person amongst the clerks, the same could not have been withdrawn abruptly and petitioner should not have been forced to work under his junior. Learned counsel further submits that may be a regular promotion was not granted to him but in view of his performance appraisal and also in view of the fact that he was recommended to work as a Head Clerk, it was not open for the respondents to review their own order by remitting the petitioner on the post of clerk. It has further been argued that since petitioner is the senior most person in the UDC Cadre and was recommended by the respondents, he be allowed to continue on RC 3 the post of Head Clerk till regular promotion are made. 6. On the other hand, Mr. Divyan, AC to learned SC-IV opposing contention of learned counsel for the petitioner argues that merely because petitioner was directed to work as a Head Clerk by way of stop gap arrangement, right has not accrued to him to claim for appointment as a Head Clerk. Recommendation to work as Head Clerk cannot be termed to be promotion. There may be recommendation but petitioner was never considered for regular promotion by a duly constituted committee for such promotion. Learned counsel further argues that petitioner was a clerk. He has been posted as a Clerk. The order for posting him as a UDC was within the jurisdiction of respondents and as such there is no any infirmity and any illegality in the order of posting the petitioner on the post where he was working earlier. Any appointment to the post of Head Clerk was a stop gap arrangement and no right has accrued to the petitioner to claim for such post and as such writ petition merits dismissal. 7. Having gone through rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that merely because petitioner has worked on the post of Head Clerk by way of stop gap arrangement, right has not accrued to him to claim for posting on the post of Head Clerk. The Head of the Department is also empowered to post the UDC on the appropriate post as per suitability and vacancy accrued. The order and direction was within the jurisdiction of the authorities and he was competent enough to post anybody as per the requirement. The seniority of the petitioner and his performance shall be considered at the time of regular promotion. If it is found fit by the Committee that the petitioner is fit for regular promotion to be posted as a Head Clerk, the same shall be considered by the competent authority. Promotion is not a right. The promotion is considered by the promotion committee as per suitability of the candidate and vacancies arisen. At this juncture, no claim can be made by the petitioner and as such writ petition merits dismissal. 8. In view of facts and circumstances discussed hereinabove, the writ petition stands dismissed. (Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) RC