M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) IN the instant writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 26.6.1995 issued under the signature of respondent No. 2, Deputy Development Commissioner -cum -Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad., Giridih, whereby the petitioner was sought to be reverted from the post of Assistant to the post of Daftari.
(2.) THE petitioner 'scase is that he was appointed as Daftari in Zila Parishad at Giridih in the year 1973. In 1981 he was promoted to the post of office Assistant vide office memo No.793 dated 13.8.1981. A copy of the office order dated 13.8.1981 is annexed as Annexure 1 to this writ petition. In the promotion order it was mentioned that the petitioner will have to pass typing examination within three months. Further case is that after promotion of the petitioner, the department could not conduct any typing examination within three months and it was only in 1984 examination was conducted but petitioner was not called for. However, in 1991 typing examination was conducted in which the petitioner had appeared but he could not succeed in the typing examination. Consequent thereupon explanation was called for vide letters dated 5.6.1991 and 21.6.1991 as to why he should not be reverted to the post of Daftari. The petitioner filed his explanation before the concerned authority stating, inter alia, that although he did not qualify in the typing examination but from 1981 to 1986 he performed the duty of Correspondence Clerk. From 1986 to 1989 he worked as Establishment Clerk. From 1989 to 1991 he worked as assistant Engineer 'sClerk and till date he has been working as Bill Clerk in the office of District Engineer of Zila Parishad, Giridih. The reversion of the petitioner after serving more than 10 years as Clerk is not justified. In the counter -affidavit filed by Zila Parishad, Giridih, it is stated that petitioner was given conditional promotion to the effect that he will have to pass typing examination. Since the petitioner failed to pass the examination in typing conducted in the 1991 and 1992 the petitioner was reverted to the post of Daftari. The respondent further stated that he filed a writ application before this Hon 'ble Court, which had been registered as CWJC No. 1272/ 94(R) and was disposed of on 28.3.1995 with the observation that if the petitioner does not fulfill the condition of his promotion, he may be reverted to the post of Daftari.
(3.) FROM perusal of the judgment passed in CWJC No. 1272/94(R), it appears that the petitioner moved the Court against the decision of the respondent to deduct, from the salary of the petitioner, the difference of amount received by him after he was reverted back to the post of Daftari from the post of Assistant. The writ petition was disposed of on 28.3.1995 by passing the following order : "Heard Mr. Majumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. Raj Nandan Sahay, for the respondents. The petitioner was originally serving as Daftari under the respondents in 1981. By order as contained in Annexure 1, the petitioner was promoted to the post of office assistant on condition that he shall have to pass Typing test within three months. While he was posted as Office Assistant and worked for a long period, no typing test was held and as such he was allowed to work as Office Assistant, but after about ten years, typing tests were held, first on 26.10.1991 then on 7.7.1992 and also 20.12.1993 and thereafter on 11.4.1994 and 14.6.1994, but in none of these typing tests, the petitioner could come out successfully and, as such, the salary drawn by the petitioner as Office Assistant during this long period was ordered to be refunded in relation to the balance of the amount of the post of Daftari and that of the Office Assistant. The grievance of the petitioner is that such reduction of salary cannot be made unless there is specific order of reversion to the post of Daftari. In the counter -affidavit, it has been stated that the petitioner has been reverted but no paper has been shown that the petitioner has been reverted to the post of Daftari. Moreover, even if he is reverted then also he would be getting all benefits during the period for which he served as Assistant, he cannot be asked to refund the balance of the difference amount of salary of the Office Assistant and that of daftari. Thus, Annexure 5 is bad in law insofar as the petitioner is concerned. In the result, this application is allowed and the order as contained in Annexure 5 is quashed insofar as the petitioner is concerned. The money which has already been deducted from the salary of the petitioner may be repaid to him. However, it is made clear that the petitioner may be reverted to the post of Daftari if he has not fulfilled the condition of his promotion, but from the date of reversion and relieved only, he should be getting the pay of Daftari and till date he was holding the post of Office assistant, he would be entitled to get the salary and other benefits to the post of Assistant. Sd/ - (Prasun Kumar Deb)." ;