Fulgence Toppo vs State of Jharkhand and others

Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner after filing of the writ application has superannuated from the post of Incharge Headmaster on 31st May, 2005. He was appointed in the year 1968 as an I.A. untrained teacher and was sent for two years teachers'' training. He was declared successful on 25.08.1971, thereafter, granted matric trained scale with effect from 1.4.1972. He was granted I.A. trained scale with effect from 4.7.1977 vide letter dated 11.10.1979 and consequent revised scale thereafter. He got the benefit of Junior Selection Grade with effect from 19.05.1981 vide letter no. 2613 dated 22.06.1990. In the present writ application, his grievance was for grant of B.A. trained scale due from 1.4.1987 and promotion to the post of Headmaster w.e.f. 1.4.1992 alleging that the persons juniors to him have been promoted. Annexure-4 is the office order of promotion issued by the District Superintendent of Education, Palamau dated 22.06.1990, in which the petitioner alleges that certain persons named at serial nos.3,5,6,8 and 10 in the Scheduled Tribes category as Headmaster have been granted B.A. trained scale w.e.f. 1.4.1987. Annexure-5 is the office order issued in August 2000, in which allegedly persons below in the gradation list of the Scheduled Tribes category at serial nos. 5,6,7 and 8 have been promoted as Headmaster w.e.f. 1.4.1992.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has been granted grade III scale w.e.f. 1.4. 1998 which is equivalent to B.A. trained scale. The petitioner has been given promotion in Grade IV scale with effect from 01.04.1999 vide Memo No. 1485 dated 19.10.2009 at Annexure-C to the counter affidavit. These orders granting Grade III and Grade IV scale have been issued by the District authorities of Latehar.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that despite repeated representations made before the District Authorities, such as, Annexure-6 series to the writ petition as well as Annexure-10 series to the reply to the counter affidavit no proper consideration has been accorded to the aforesaid grievance.

In the counter affidavit of the respondents, it is averred that the petitioner passed B.A. examination on 07.10.1985 and on that basis the petitioner has claimed seniority over the persons, who had been granted I.A. and B.A. trained scale earlier than the petitioner. In the gradation list prepared on 21.07.2009 the petitioner''s name stands at serial no.1, therefore, his case has been considered and has been granted Grade II and Grade III scale w.e.f. 1.4.1986 and 1.1.1998 respectively in the scheduled tribes category. According to the respondents the petitioner is not a successful candidate for promotion to the post of Headmaster and permissible grades of pay have been granted to him from due date.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated his submission relating to discrimination in the matter of promotion vis-a-vis junior persons. It is also pointed out that the services of the petitioner were earlier in the old Palamau district before creation to district of Laltehar and after bifurcation of the State he has served and retired from the district of Latehar. His grievance has been ignored only for this reason.

I have considered the submission of the learned counsel for the parties. In a matter of promotion, the petitioner apparently has raised his grievance after certain delay at the fag end of service. The plea of the petitioner that certain juniors have been granted promotion by the order at Annexure-5 passed in August 2000 to the post of Headmaster in the Scheduled Tribes category, however, does not specifically stand replied by the respondents in their counter affidavit, which refers to the details of the petitioner''s service career and grant of Grade II and Grade III scale with effect from 1.1.1986 and 1.4.1998 respectively. The order at Annexure-5 has been passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Palamau while services of the petitioner have come in the District of Latehar created thereafter. He claims to have also worked as Incharge Headmaster since 24.06.1986 itself.

Be that as it may, the order of promotion of persons alleged to have been juniors to the present petitioner having been passed in August 2000 and the contention based on that having remained uncontroverted in the counter affidavit of the respondents as well, it is deemed appropriate that the respondent authorities of the District of Latehar accord due consideration to the aforesaid grievance taking into the inter-se seniority position of the petitioner to the other such persons within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with a detailed representation on this part.

Needless to say that upon such consideration, if the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Headmaster is found to be genuine and legally tenable, the respondents would grant consequential benefit that may arise therefrom within a reasonable time thereafter.

This writ application stands disposed of accordingly.