AJIT KUMAR SINHA, J. - (1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred for grant of the following relief: -A) The Office order dated 15.5.2002 issued by the Dy. Secretary be quashed. B) The Respondents be directed not to give effect to the rejection orders dated 15.5.2002 and to consider the case of the petitioner afresh on the basis of the selection list dated 3.11.1998 so submitted by the promotion committee. C)The Respondents be directed to issue the promotion order with retrospective effect as has been given to 15 same and similarly situated persons without any further delay and to give all consequential benefits thereon. D)The Respondents be directed to pay the equal salary for equal work i.e. to the post of Instructor to the petitioner for which he is working since 1997.
(2.) THE facts, in brief, as submitted by the petitioner is stated as under: The petitioner was initially appointed to the post of Clerk in the Electricity Board, B.I.T. Sindri in the scale of Rs.1200 -1800/ -(revised pay scale Rs.4000 -6000/ -). He was transferred and posted as Instructor in the Electrical Department (old Machine Lab.,Sindri) vide Office order dated 8.12.1997 and he accordingly handed over the charge and joined the post of Instructor. According to the petitioner the post of Clerk as well as the post of Instructor is inter -changeable in the scale of Rs.1400 -2300/ -(revised to Rs.4500 -7000/ -). The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was matriculate and possessed certificate of Diploma in Engineering (Electrical) and accordingly fulfill the required qualification for the post of Instructor and it was in these background that he was posted as Instructor. The main grievance of the petitioner is that even though he was holding the post of Instructor continuously since January, 1998 he was not paid the salary for the said post which was revised to Rs.4500 -7000/ -. It is further submitted that a Selection Committee of three competent officers was appointed who shortlisted 17 employees and recommended their promotion against their respective promotional post mentioned therein and letter was accordingly issued on 3.11.98 and the Director sent the list to the Science and Technology Department, Bihar for issuance of appropriate order for the promotion of the employees in question. The petitioners name figured at serial No.12 in the promotion list and he was recommended for the post of Instructor in the scale of Rs.1400 -2300/ -but no official letter was passed on it nor the same was approved. Being constrained the petitioner moved this Honble Court in C.W.J.C. No.2720 of 1999 ® for issuance of a direction to the respondents to pass the approval order of the promotion list dated 3.11.98. The writ petition was disposed of on 4.7.2000 with the direction to the respondent No.2 the Director, Science and Technology Department, Ranchi to consider the representation of the petitioner in the light of the list submitted by B.I.T., Sindri and take a decision in the matter of promotion of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of two months. During that period, according to the petitioner, 15 candidates from the list dated 3.11.98 were promoted vide Office order dated 27.9.2000 and 13.10.2000 and no decision was taken with regard to the left over 55 candidates. This also led to filing of a contempt petition. However, in the meanwhile the Bihar Re -organisation Act, 2000 came into force and accordingly the Secretary, Science and Technology Department, Jharkhand was requested vide letter dated 4.7.2001 to take necessary action in compliance to the order passed by the Honble High Court and the contempt petition was dropped vide order dated 19.7.2001 with liberty to pursue the claim by the Director, Science and Technology Department, State of Jharkhand. In compliance to the order the Deputy Secretary vide its order dated 15.5.2002 rejected the claim of the petitioner to the post of Instructor. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that the Office order dated 15.5.2002 is illegal, arbitrary and based on extraneous circumstances and is thus unsustainable in the eyes of law. It has further been contended that the petitioner was holding the post of Instructor since 1997, thus he was entitled to promotion to the post of Instructor and the denial on the ground that the post is beyond promotional discipline/channel was on the face of it illegal and arbitrary. It has also been contended that the denial of promotion on the ground that the appointment of petitioner was on compassionate ground was perverse, illegal and malafide apart from being violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
(3.) THE counsel for the respondent has submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Clerk with effect from 26.7.1993 and was working in the Establishment Section and then in Account Section of the Institute. Thereafter on 21.11.1997 the petitioner was posted in the grade of Clerk in the Electrical Engineering Department of the Institute and was getting the salary for the post he was holding. According to the respondent the post of Clerk was a non -technical cadre post whereas the post of Instructor is a technical cadre post and was completely different both by way of discipline as well as its cadre and as such the petitioner was not eligible for promotion to the post of Instructor since it was a different cadre and discipline and accordingly the Deputy Secretary rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner vide its impugned order dated 15.5.2002. It has further been submitted that even the respondent has no authority to change the cadre post of the petitioner and the respondents have specifically denied that the petitioner is holding the post of Instructor from 1997 and have stated that the claim is false, baseless and misleading. According to the respondent, the petitioner was posted on the same post of Clerk in the Electrical Engineering Department of the Institute and the post of Clerk and Instructor are not interchangeable. According to the respondents, the qualification of the Instructor is as under: - a) Basic Qualification : Matric. b) Trade Certificate (I.T.I.) of the State Council for Technical and Vocational Training in the relevant trade or equivalent recognized by the State Government. c) Three years technical experience in firm or institute of repute. ;