ORDER
Amareshwar Sahay, J.
1. Heard the parties.
An advertisement was published in the year 1978 for appointment to the post of Teachers Fellows (Non-Gazetted). The petitioners applied against the said posts and, thereafter, they were appointed in the year 1979 on a fixed salary of Rs. 500/- per month. Since, their services were not regularized even after completion of about 18 years of service; they approached this Court in CWJC No. 1073/1997 for direction upon the respondents for their absorption in the post of Lecturer in the Department of Science and Technology.
The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 9.10.1998 as contained in Annexure-20 to this writ petition.
2. From perusal of the order dated 9.10.1998, contained in Annexure-20, it appears that the High Court noticed the fact that it was not disputed on behalf of the State that the petitioners were continuing in the post of Teacher Fellow since 1979 after their selection, on a fixed salary. It was held that when the petitioners were appointed through advertisement and after proper selection and they were continuing in service for almost 20 years, it would not be proper to deny regularization of their appointment on a regular scale of pay. Consequently, the direction was made to the State Government to send a fresh request to the Public Service Commission for consideration the case of the petitioners for regularization within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order and the Public Service Commission was directed to consider the claim of the petitioners in proper perspective in the light of the observation made in the said order regarding grant of concurrence to their appointment.
3. A Selection Committee of Bihar Public Service Commission interviewed the petitioners and, thereafter, observed that the Selection Committee was not in favour of the appointment of the petitioners to the posts of Lecturer from the date of appointment as Teachers Fellows but recommended their cases for fresh appointment from the date of their interview for the posts of Lecturer. The said recommendation of the Commission was sent to the State Government by issue of Annexure-21. Thereafter, a Notification contained in Annexure-22 was issued on 16.3.2000 making appointment of the petitioner against the posts of Lecturer in the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000/- on temporary basis.
4. Being aggrieved against their fresh appointment, the petitioners made representation before the Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, Patna, Bihar to consider their cases for absorption from the date of joining as Teachers Fellows and to give them arrears of salary after making pay fixation from the date of initial joining, i.e. from the year 1979.
5. The petitioners, thereafter, filed another writ petition being W.P.S. No. 455/2002 before this Court claiming benefit of 21 years of service rendered by them on temporary basis and prayed for determination of their seniority. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 17.1.2002 as contained in Annexure-24, by giving liberty to the petitioners to bring those facts to the notice of the Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, Jharkhand, Ranchi to determine as from which date the petitioners seniority would be counted in view of the High Court’s order. Thereafter, the petitioners made a detailed representation before the Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, State of Jharkhand. The Secretary, Department of Science, Technology and Information, Jharkhand, Ranchi, by order as contained in Annexure-26 dated 20th May, 2002, rejected the representation of the petitioners on the ground that the posts of Teachers Fellows was neither a regular post nor any pay scale was prescribed for the said post. As a matter of fact when there was paucity of teachers, teachers were appointed on ad hoc basis and those teachers were being paid a fixed honorarium of Rs. 500/- per month. Therefore, the claim of the petitioners for their absorption from the date of their initial appointment as Teachers Fellows was not tenable.
6. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the order as contained in Annexure-26, rejecting the representation of the petitioners is bad in law since it has been passed without proper application of mind. The Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, Jharkhand, Ranchi has ignored the communication and correspondence between the State Government and the Commission with respect to the proposal for absorption of the petitioners in the service. The documents as well as the several judgments submitted by the petitioners alongwith the representation have not been considered by respondent No. 3, Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, Jharkhand, Ranchi and, thereby, the petitioners have been deprived of their benefit of 21 years uninterrupted service rendered by them.
All those documents, referred to above, have been annexed with this writ petition also.
7. As ordered by this Court in the earlier writ petition, the issue was to be determined firstly by the Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi but I find from the impugned order as contained in Annexure-26 that the claim of the petitioners have been rejected solely on the ground that the posts of Teachers Fellows was neither a regular post nor any salary was prescribed for the said post. From the said order it does not appear that respondent No. 3 has considered the points raised by the petitioners in the representation nor does it appear that he has considered the documents submitted by them alongwith the representation and, therefore, in my view, the impugned order as contained in Annexure-2 suffers from non- application of mind.
8. In this view of the matter, this writ application is allowed. The order as contained in Annexure-26 is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back again to respondent No. 3, i.e. the Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, Government of Jharkhand to consider the representation of the petitioners as well as the documents submitted by them alongwith the representation afresh and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order, as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
9. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to post.