Rajkumar Bharti vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing of letter No. 1857 dated 18.04.2017 issued by the Under Secretary (Admin),

Government of Jharkhand.

The factual exposition as has been delineated in the writ petition is that the petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer vide Memo No. 6589 dated

22.07.1989 in the erstwhile State of Bihar in the Department of Water Resources. He belongs to District Deoria, Uttar Pradesh. After accepting the

appointment letter, he joined the services on 01.08.1989 and service book was also opened on 22.01.1991 and relevant entries were made therein. It is

further the case of the petitioner that he was granted promotion from the post of Junior Engineer to the post of Assistant Engineer vide Memo No.

2525 dated 17.06.2005 by erstwhile State of Bihar in which his name appears at Sr. No. 40 (Reserve Quota List) and it was given effect from

11.01.1998. The said promotion was given in the regular manner after decision of the Departmental Promotion Committee and in consultation with

Bihar Public Service Commission, but the same was subsequently withdrawn vide letter No. 5527 dated 19.11.2011 by the State of Jharkhnad

(Department of Water Resources). However, being senior, the petitioner was allowed to work as Assistant Engineer (in current charge) since the

petitioner and other junior engineer appointed in the year, 1989 had become eligible for ACP benefits and the higher salary paid was adjusted

/regularized from ACP benefits w.e.f. 2001 on completion of 12 years of satisfactory service.

It is further the case of the petitioner that thereafter the name of the petitioner was considered alongwith several others by the Departmental

Promotion Committee in consultation with Jharkhand Public Service Commission and vide Notification No. 2449 dated 30.04.2013, petitioner along

with others was again granted regular promotion and he was allowed to continue on the same post where he was working since before in current

charge. The name of the petitioner appeared at Sr. No. 79. The promotion was given in compliance of the order passed by this Hon’ble court in

W.P.(S) No.1009/2011 filed by one Parmanand Paswan. It is specific case of the petitioner that in view of letter dated 30.03.2016 issued by the

respondent No.2 in view of the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court promotion given to reserved category Junior Engineers to Assistant Engineers,

who belongs to other State, has to be withdrawn for which show cause has been issued and some of those Engineers are working in Jharkhand after

cadre allocation. Thereafter, vide Letter No. 1857 dated 18.04.2017, a notice was issued by Under Secretary (Admin) to the petitioner seeking show

cause as to why the order of promotion be not recalled meaning thereby that the petitioner be not demoted as Junior Engineer. Aggrieved by the said

notice, the petitioner has been constrained to knock the door of this Court.

Mr. Mahesh Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously argues that in no way, the promotion granted by the Departmental Promotion

Committee approved by Jharkhand Public Service Commission can be taken away on the ground of reservation. Learned counsel further argues that

any promotion granted by the erstwhile State of Bihar cannot be taken away or the petitioner cannot be reverted back to the original post by the State

of Jharkhand and as such, the impugned notice is fit to be quashed and set aside.

Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents vehemently opposes the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner

and submits that writ petition itself is premature as only the notice has been issued to the petitioner. The petitioner is free to take all these points before

the competent authority and the competent authority shall pass a final order and it was only the final order is passed the petitioner can be said to be

aggrieved, if at all, which is against him. Learned counsel further argues that till date promotion granted to the petitioner has not yet been cancelled.

Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has rushed to this

Court without giving reply to the show cause. The petitioner is at liberty to take all these points before the competent authority and place any other

documents, the petitioner wants to place before the said authority, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

In view of the fact that petitioner has rushed to this Court prematurely and only on issuance of show cause, I hereby direct the respondent No.3 to

consider the case of the petitioner and after receiving of the show cause reply, pass a reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner as and when the petitioner approaches before them, preferably within a period of eight weeks. In the meantime, no adverse order shall be

passed against the petitioner till final disposal of the representation.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, writ petition stands disposed of.