MITHLESHWAR VERMA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioners have originally come for quashing the seniority list contained at memo no. 1645 dated 2.5.2006 issued by the Respondent No. 3, District Superintendent of Education, West Singhbhum, Chaibasha as the petitioners were shown to be placed under Grade-I i.e. Matric trained scale, although according to these petitioners they were already having Graduate trained Science teacher scale of pay in Grade IV even prior to the coming into force of Bihar Taken Over Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rules, 1993 with effect from the respective dates on which they have acquired the qualification of training. Counsel for the petitioner submits that these petitioners were appointed on vacant post of Science Teachers in the scale of 680-965 in different middle schools.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the orders contained at memo dated 5.5.92 (Annexure-2 and 2/1), 29.9.1992 (Annexure-2/2) and memo dated 3.9.1992 (Annexure-2/3) and memo dated 9.9.1992 to support that these petitioners were granted B.Sc. trained scale w.e.f. the date on which they acquired qualification of teachers training and as per the said orders the petitioners were granted B.Sc. trained scale of the 1640-2900 prevalent at the relevant point of time. These petitioners by referring to the impugned letters stated that it clearly shows that the column relating to the dates of acquisition of training of petitioner no. 1 and 2 is 8.6.1987 and for petitioner no. 3, 4 and 5 is 24.6.1992 and are respectively shown at serial no. 20, 21, 52, 53, 58 of the said list During the pendency of the writ petition the respondents issued an order which (sic) contained at Annexure-10 series in respect of petitioner no. 3, 4 and 5 by which their grant of scale of Graduate trained Science teacher, purportedly on the basis of audit objection was held to be illegal and contrary to the Rules.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioners submit that by the said orders, which have been challenged pursuant to the I.A. No. 558 of 2007 being allowed by this Court, the promotion granted to these petitioners to the B.Sc. Trained Scale have also been cancelled. Counsel for the petitioners, therefore, submitted that the impugned action of the respondents amounts to reduction in rank/scale from Grade-IV to Grade-I which petitioners were enjoying by virtue of being granted B.Sc. trained Scale from the respective dates of acquisition of their qualification of such training in the year from 1987 to 1992. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Bihar Taken Over Elementary School Teachers Rules, 1993 which have been relied upon by the respondents have been held to be prospectively applicable and in view of the Judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Arvind Bhushan Dey & other analogous cases vide judgment dated 5.12.2008 reported in , : 2009 (1) JLJR 338. It is submitted that the said judgment has also been followed subsequently by this Court in the case of Bijendra Kumar Sinha in C.W.J.C. No. 2115 of 2001 decided on 1.3.2012. Counsel for the petitioners, therefore, submitted that the impugned actions are wholly arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable in law. The petitioners have acquired the vested rights for having remained in B.Sc. trained scale in 1987 and 1992 respectively on the basis of valid orders passed by the competent authority at the relevant point of time before coming into force of 1993 Rules which are being taken away by the impugned orders by the respondent-authorities. It is further submitted that these action amounting to reduction of rank can only be done in accordance with the provision of Article 309 to 311 under the Constitution of India.