RAM PRABHU PANDEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by one Ram Prabhu Pandey, an Additional District & Sessions Judge -cum -Fast Track Court (since retired), for grant of benefit of ''Selection Grade '' in the cadre of District Judge (Entry Level).

(2.) THE petitioner joined the judicial service in the State of Bihar on 13th June 1975. Over a course of time, he was promoted to the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division) on 5th December 1996. While he was serving in the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division), under Government Notification dated 22nd January 2002 he, then the Subordinate Judge I -cum -Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, was promoted as Additional District & Sessions Judge, Aurangabad on Ad -hoc basis to preside over the Fast Track Court. Pursuant to the said Notification, the petitioner joined as Ad -hoc Additional District & Sessions Judge -cum -Fast Track Court on 11th February 2002. While he was functioning as Ad -hoc Additional District & Sessions Judge, he was promoted as Additional District & Sessions Judge in Superior Judicial Service on regular basis, and he joined as such on 21st December 2002. He was promoted to the rank of District Judge and was appointed as Principal Judge, Family Court on 18th September 2006. While functioning as Principal Judge, Family Court, on reaching the age of superannuation, he retired from service on 31st October 2007. Since his retirement, in 2009 he raised the claim for promotion to ''Selection Grade ''. The said claim came to be rejected on 22nd February 2010. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in the present writ Petition.

(3.) THE Petition is contested by the respondents, the Patna High Court and the State Government. Learned Advocate Mr. Satyabir Bharti has appeared for the High Court. He has relied upon the counter affidavits and the judgement of the Hon 'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Brij Mohanlal (supra). Mr. Bharti has also relied upon the Rules for Ad -hoc appointment of Judicial Officers in the State of Bihar under the special scheme for elimination of arrears sponsored by the Central Government, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as ''the 2001 Rules ''). In the submission of Mr. Bharti, the Ad -hoc service was fortuitous and cannot be treated as regular service as Additional District & Sessions Judge. The said period cannot be counted for the purpose of seniority in the cadre of Additional District & Sessions Judge. He has also relied upon the Government Resolution dated 9th February 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ''the 2005 G.R. '') issued in respect of extension of the benefit of ''Selection Grade '' and of ''Super Time Scale '' to the officers in Superior Judicial Service. He has submitted that under the 2005 G.R. the ''Selection Grade '' is admissible on completion of five years ' satisfactory service as a District Judge. He has submitted that the petitioner entered the rank of District Judge in 2006, he did not complete five years ' service in the rank of District Judge. Irrespective of his seniority, he was not entitled to the benefit of ''Selection Grade '' claimed by him. In support of his submission Mr. Bharti has relied upon the judgment in the matter of Brij Mohanlal (1) (supra).