Rongon Mukhopadhyay,J. - (1.) In this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order as contained in Memo No. 6954 dated 05.06.2012 issued by the Respondent No. 2 whereby and where under the claim of the petitioners for being upgraded to the post of Personnel Assistant was rejected. Further prayer has been made by the writ petitioners to consider the claim of the petitioners who are working in the post of Steno Typist in the Water Resources Department since 1983-1984 for their merger/absorption/up gradation on the post of Personal Assistant with all consequential benefits from the date when their juniors have been granted the same benefits.
(2.) The facts emanating from the pleadings made in the writ application is that the petitioners were appointed on the post of Steno Typist against vacant sanctioned post by the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department and pursuant to their appointment the petitioners had given their joining. The service of the petitioner No. 1 was approved/regularized vide Office order as contained in Memo No. 3320 dated 09.12.1985 whereas the service of the petitioner No. 2 was absorbed/regularized vide order as contained in Memo No. 1012 dated 31.03.1989. The Government of Bihar took a decision to absorb the Steno Typist who had been working under the different Departments of the State Government on the post of Personal Assistant and cut off date was fixed as 10.07.1979. Subsequently, the Government of Bihar enhanced the cut off date of the appointment of Steno Typist to 10.11.1988. Since the case of the petitioners were not being considered the petitioners preferred a writ application being W.P.(S) No. 2310 of 2009 which was disposed of on 17.11.2011 directing the respondent No. 2 to decide the claim of the petitioners keeping in mind Annexures - 5 and 6 to the writ application as well as Annexure - 19 of the supplementary affidavit wherein juniors to the petitioners were given a superior post. Subsequently the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 2310 of 2009 was modified to the extent that the representation was to be considered by the respondent No. 3. The impugned order as contained in Memo No. 6954 dated 05.06.2012 was passed by the respondent No. 2 whereby and where under the claim of the petitioners for regularization/absorption on the post of Personal Assistant was rejected which is under challenge in the present writ application.
(3.) Heard Mrs. Ritu Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned J. C. to A.A.G. for the State.;