Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No.3266 of 2014 with W.P.(S).No.5266 of 2014 1. Deobrat Bhhatarcharya 2. Satya Deo Choudhary 3. Shambhu Shankar Prasad Singh 4. Sunil Kumar Sinha 5. Sharda Singh 6. Randhir Kumar Srivastava 7. Ram Naresh Sharma 8. Ram Kripal Singh 9. Jeevan Prasad 10. Umesh Kumar Roy 11. Ram Dayal Singh 12. Binod Kumar Bhagat 13. Arun Kumar Thakur 14. Krishna Kumar Agarwal 15. Paras Nath Tiwary 16. Sudhir Kumar 17. Haribansh Pandey ….... Petitioner (W.P.S. No.3266/2014) 1. Uttpal Kumar Mukherjee 2. Arun Kumar 3. Dewaki Nandan Mishra 4. Mukhram Singh 5. Umesh Kumar Singh 6. Raj Kishore Karan 7. Nand Kumar Singh 8. Madhaw Singh 9. Tribhuwan Narain Singh 10. Ravi Shanker 11. Shyam Sunder 12. Binod Kumar 13. Ramanand Jha 14. Umesh Prasad 15. Bali Ram Pandey 16. Bhagirath Mahto 17. Pramod Kumar Sinha 18. Suprvat Mukherjee 19. Dina Nath Singh 20. Nand Lal Mandal ….... Petitioner(In W.P.S. No. 5266/2014) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi 2. The Development Commissioner, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Ranchi 4. The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Ranchi 5. The Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department, Ranchi ..... Respondents (in both cases) ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : M/s Rajiv Ranjan, Shresth Gautam For the Respondents : Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, G.P. VI ….... 06/30.04.2015 Petitioners in both the writ petitions had entered into service on the post of Junior Engineer in the year 1979 in the Water Resources Department upon a conscious decision of the erstwhile Government of -2- Bihar. By Annexure-1, notification dated 14.1.1982, it is the case of the petitioners that their post were converted to the post of Assistant Engineer(Mechanical) under the same department. These petitioners got the benefit of time bound promotion on completion of 10 years of service reckoning from the date on which they entered service as Junior Engineer, as per the notification dated 13.8.1992 bearing memo no. 338 which is at Annexure-2 to the writ petition. These petitioners were integrated in the cadre of Assistant Engineer and a common gradation list was also prepared. Not only this, it is pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner that by reckoning their services from the year 1979, benefits of first and second A.C.P have also been granted vide order at Annexure-5 dated 4.3.2005 and 24.3.2006, which has subsequently been confirmed. It is also their case that post of similarly situated employees in the erstwhile State of Bihar were converted to the post of Assistant Engineer vide Annexure-1. They have been granted the benefits of third M.A.C.P reckoning their services from the year of their joining as Junior Engineer in 1979. It is also their case that incumbents like petitioners who also entered into service as Junior Engineer in the same department in the year 1979 and are working in the present State of Jharkhand have been granted the benefits of third M.A.C.P reckoning their services from 1979 as would appear from Annexure-7, notification dated 27.7.2011 where their names figure at serial no. 63 to 65. Learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to para 14 of the writ petition submitted that respondent- State has granted third M.A.C.P to similarly situated persons as reflected in Annexure-9, notification dated 18.7.2012 issued by the Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Government of Jharkhand who were also appointed along with the petitioners and whose services thereafter were transferred to the department of Water Resources. The grievance of the petitioners has now arisen as at the time of grant of third M.A.C.P the respondent- department in consultation with the Finance Department has taken a -3- volte face. The services of the petitioner from the year 1979, which were earlier reckoned for conferring financial upgradation like the first and second A.C.P has now been departed from on the interpretation of the particular provision under Para 11 of the M.A.C.P scheme. The latest stand of the respondents is in the nature of reprobation from its earlier stand which cannot be countenanced in law. Learned counsel for the respondent- State has laboured to defend the decision of the respondent-department on the basis of aforesaid provision of M.A.C.P scheme as per which the services are to be reckoned from the date of regular appointment i.e. 1982 in the instant case. The aforesaid state of facts, which have been noticed herein above on the issue at hand gives a prima facie impression that the respondent- department had been reckoning the services of the petitioners all along, even in the erstwhile State of Bihar from 1979 for the purpose of service benefits like financial upgradation. At this stage, the stand of the respondents in the matters of grant of M.A.C.P, especially when the petitioners have evidenced instances of other persons of the same department and other department who have been granted M.A.C.P reckoning their services from 1979 appears to be incongruent. In view of the aforesaid conspicuous facts noticed in the instant matter, it appears that the whole issue requires reconsideration at the level of the respondent- department as the benefits earlier granted treating the petitioners to be in service from 1979 is now being sought to be denied by a new logic that petitioners have entered in regular service in 1982 for the first time for the purpose of grant of M.A.C.P. Such a stand on the part of the respondents also amounts to approbation and reprobation, which cannot be countenanced in the eye of law. Therefore, the matter is remitted to the competent authority / -4- respondent no.4,the Secretary, Water Resources Department, Ranchi to reconsider the grievance of the petitioners by taking a fresh decision on the whole issue in accordance with law keeping in light all attendant facts and legal issues and the observations made herein above. Petitioners are also at liberty to make a detailed representation including the pleadings of the instant writ petition as well before the respondent no.4, the Secretary, Water Resources Department, Ranchi. Let such decision be taken within a reasonable time preferably 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Both the writ petitions stands disposed of. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) A. Mohanty