PATNA HIGH COURT ISSUES JUDGEMENT ON SUDHIR KUMAR DAS V/S THE BIHAR STATE AND OTHERS

PATNA, India, July 7 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on July 1:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed for quashing letter No. 242 dated 09.03.2016 communicating rejection of petitioner's representation and refusing to grant him pay and other allowances for the post of Director (I.T) for the period 24.04.2001 to 30.09.2009, on the ground that the petitioner was selected and appointed on the post of Director (I.T) with effect from 24.04.2001 and by the said letter dated 09.03.2016, the respondents have refused to extent him any benefit of pay and allowances for the post of Director (I.T) prior to the date of his confirmation.

3. Counsel further submits that the petitioner joined service of Bihar State Electricity Board (now Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd,) as Assistant Electrical Engineer pursuant to his appointment vide Board's letter contained in Notification No. 416 dated 01.10.1984. He further submits that upon completion of eight years of regular and continuous service, he was given pay scale of Electrical Executive Engineer with effect from 01.01.1993 and since the post of Electrical Executive Engineer was not vacant, he was designated as Senior Engineer with effect from 01.01.1993 and after completion of 14 years of regular and continuous service, he was given the pay scale of Selection Grade Electrical Executive Engineer and designated as Senior Engineer (Special Grade). He further submits that the petitioner could not get regular promotion to the post of Executive Engineer w.e.f. 01.10.2002.

4. Counsel further submits that the Bihar State Electricity Board brought in existence Department of Information Technology vide notification No. 196 dated 26.07.2000 and post of Director (I.T) was created to act as head of the department of I.T and manage it independently. He further submits that after creation of separate department and post of Director (I.T) and other posts for the newly constituted department for its smooth functioning, the Board issued advertisement vide notice published in Newspaper inviting applications from eligible candidates to apply for selection & appointment to the post of (Director) I.T. The petitioner having the required eligibility and criteria for the post of Director (I.T) and after rigorous selection process, found suitable and vide Notification No. 135 dated 24.04.2001 he was appointed to the post of Director I.T with a condition of keeping on probation period for six months. Counsel further submits that the petitioner had joined on a sanctioned and vacant post of Director (I.T) but he was kept in his own pay scale. At the time of his selection, he was in the pay scale of Electrical Executive Engineer. In addition to that he was paid Rs. 400/- as special pay prior to assuming charge of post of Director (I.T). Counsel further submits that after completion of training, the petitioner joined and he has immediately filed a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 8207 of 2004 for regularization as Director (I.T) which was disposed of vide order dated 14.11.2005, directing the Board to issue such notification and his case to be considered for confirmation on the post of Director in terms of notification dated 24th April 2001 as soon as the petitioner will complete seven years in the pay scale of Electrical Executive Engineer. The petitioner being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order moved in Civil Review No. 258 of 2005, which was disposed of by the order dated 13.05.2009 with observation that the Court had already observed that the date of grant of the pay scale of Executive Engineer to the petitioner shall be relevant for consideration. Counsel further submits that after completion of seven years, he was granted benefit of Director (I.T.) with effect from 01.10.2009 but the department has not provided him benefit since 24.04.2001 to 01.10.2009, for which he is legally entitled. The petitioner moved before this Court in CWJC No. 2856 of 2011 challenging the legality of the order of confirmation with effect from 01.10.2009, but he lost. Then, he moved in L.P.A and also in S.L.P. but he could not be granted any relief and thereafter, the petitioner has moved before this Court in the present writ petition against the rejection of petitioner's representation refusing to grant him pay and other allowances for the post of Director (I.T) for the period of 24.04.2001 to 30.09.2009. Counsel further submits that in the light of the Rule 103 of the Bihar Service Code which is applicable in case of the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled for the said benefits, as the cause of action has accrued to him from the date when his service was confirmed on the post of Director (I.T), and therefore, he submits that the earlier decision made by this Court shall not create bar for the petitioner. He further submits that the law laid down under Section 103 of the Bihar Service Code is very much clear according to which the refusal of petitioner's representation is completely in violation of law. 5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that it is the third round of litigation for the petitioner. In the first round, the petitioner has moved before this Hon'ble Court in CWJC No. 8207 of 2004 which was disposed off with specific direction that the right of the petitioner to be considered for confirmation in the post of Director, Information Technology will occur in favour of the petitioner in terms of the notification dated 24th April, 2001 and as soon as the petitioner will complete seven years in the pay scale of Electrical Executive Engineer and then only he shall be entitled for the relief.

The rest of the document can be viewed at https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTUjODQzMSMyMDE2IzEjTg==-ELHSmdeSqn0=

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.