Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 07.04.2003 (Annexure -11) by which his representation has been rejected by the respondent no. 5, District Superintendent of Education, Garhwa for grant of B.A. trained scale and promotion in the scale of Headmaster.
(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, he had earlier approached this Court in CWJC No. 866 of 2000 for the same relief as one Jasmuddin Khan, who is junior to the petitioner, was granted B.A. Trained scale in the year 1979 and placed senior to the petitioner, who acquired B.A. Degree in the year 1981. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed in the year 1965 while other persons have been appointed in the year 1966 on the same post of Assistant Teacher. The petitioner was aggrieved on the first occasion as by the impugned action of the respondents, the seniority of the petitioner was being affected. It is submitted by relying upon the order dated 06.01.2003 (Annexure -10) on behalf of the petitioner that issue relating to inter se seniority between Jasmuddin Khan and the petitioner was considered and decided by this Court holding that acquisition of higher qualification does not entitle a person to become senior in the matter of grant of higher grade. It is further submitted that in the said judgment itself, this Court observed that nothing has been shown that Jasmuddin was promoted earlier on account of district roster policy and there was no vacancy for the petitioner. On remand by this Court, the respondents have again passed similar order, which is contained at Annexure -12 by which the representation of the petitioner has been rejected on similar ground. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, justified the impugned order stating that petitioner had passed the B.A. Trained Examination in the year 1981 while other person Jasmuddin had done so in the year 1979. However, it appears that counsel for the respondent is not able to dispute the position settled by the judgment of this Court in CWJC No. 866 of 2000 in the case of the petitioner himself vide judgment dated 06.01.2003.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and gone through the relevant materials on record as well as relevant portion of the judgment dated 06.01.2003 passed in CWJC No. 866 of 2000 (Annexure -10, which is quoted herein below: - It is well settled principle of law that the seniority has to be computed from the date of entering into the service and admittedly the petitioner was senior to Jasmuddin. As stated earlier only acquisition of higher qualification does not entitle a person to become senior. The only effect of that acquisition of qualification is that a person who acquires such qualification becomes eligible for being considered for the higher grade, if the higher post requires that qualification. Eligibility for consideration for higher grade is quite a different fact then the inter se seniority. If the promotion to the higher grade would have taken in the year 1979 or prior to 1981 when the petitioner had not got the qualification of B.A. then the petitioner could have been excluded on the ground that the petitioner was not eligible for being considered. But since the promotions were given in the year 1987 when both the petitioner and Jasmuddin had come within the consideration Zone for promotion then in that circumstances as the enhanced qualification is not the only basic criteria for promotion, because denying the promotion to petitioner ignoring original seniority was unjustified. As it has been stated earlier that nothing has been shown that Jasmuddin was not under the District Roster Policy and therefore he was promoted earlier and no vacancy was there for the petitioner. Therefore, on this ground also the promotion of the Jasmuddin who was junior to the petitioner can not be held valid. I am not dealing with the validity of the promotion of Jasmuddin but I am only concerned with the promotion of the petitioner. The posted question is answered accordingly. In the aforesaid circumstance, the respondents are; directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner in the light of the observation made above within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and Annexure -8 is quashed. The respondents are also directed to consider the question of granting the post of Headmaster to him, besides B.A. Trained scale. The writ is allowed at the admission stage itself.;