JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) HEARD Sri Prabhat Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and J.C. to A.G. on behalf of the respondent -State.
(2.) THE petitioner in this writ application has prayed for directing the respondents to grant him the first time bound promotion with effect from 19.4.1981 i.e. the date when the petitioner had completed 10 years of his continuous
service and also to grant him benefits of the second Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP) since 9.8.1999 i.
e. the date when it fell due. A further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to grant promotion to
the petitioner to the post of Head Clerk with effect from 31.7.1983 i.e. the date on which the permanent post of
Head Cierk fell vacant after the retirement of the previous incumbent and the petitioner was given charge of the
same on account of his being seniormost permanent clerk in the department.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would explain that the petitioner had entered into service under the respondents as permanent clerk on 19.4.1971. He had completed 10 years of his continuous service thereafter
on 19.4.1981. Under the scheme for time bound promotion, the petitioner was entitled for the first time bound
promotion with effect from 19.04.1981 but the same was not given to him. Subsequently, after the change in
policy of the State Government, the scheme of time bound promotion was replaced by the scheme of A.C.P. and
the petitioner was entitled to the benefits of A.C.P. as because he was eligible for the same by virtue of the fact
that he had passed all the requisite departmental examinations even by the year 1973 itself. Furthermore, after
the retirement of the previous Head Clerk of the Department, the petitioner was given to officiate in the post of
Head Clerk from 31.7.1983 till the date of his retirement on 31.10.2001. Learned counsel informs that initially he
was given the scale of Head Clerk on account of officiating in the said post but later, the scale was withdrawn
and the same was denied to the petitioner. Learned counsel informs further that though the petitioner has
submitted his representations repeatedly, the last being on 29.9.2008 (Annexure -3), but till date his
representations have not yielded any favourable response from the concerned authorities of the respondents.
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. Referring to the contents of para 19 of the counter affidavit, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the matter relating to the grant of second A.C.
P. and the consequential benefits thereof, including revision of pension etc. of the petitioner, is under active
consideration of the concerned department. In para 8 of the counter affidavit, which is in reply to the
petitioner's claim that the pay scale of Head Clerk was not given to him even though he was made to work
on the said post for 18 years as Incharge Head Clerk, the stand of the respondents is that such claim of the State Of Jharkhand Through Director General Of Police Versus Thakur Ajit Kumar
petitioner is not worth consideration as because it is common practice that in view to impart training at job, juniors
are given opportunity to work as Incharge of the higher post.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.