IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
LPA No.932 of 2010
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR.
2. THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY,
FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERMENT OF
BIHAR, PATNA.
3. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER, ACCOUNTS
ADMINISTRATION-CUM-DIRECTOR,
PROVIDENT FUND DIRECTORATE, FINANCE
DEPARTMENT, BIHAR AT PANT BHAWAN,
PATNA.
4. THE DY. DIRECTOR, PROVIDENT FUND
DIRECTORATE, BIHAR, PATNA.
5. THE DISTRICT PROVIDENT FUND OFFICER,
WEST CHAMPARAN, BETTIAH.
6. THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, WEST
CHAMPARAN, BETTIAH.
7. THE DISTRICT ACCOUNTS OFFICER, WEST
CHAMPARAN, BETTIAH.
8. THE SECRETARY/COMMISSIONER, MINOR
IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, VIKASH
BHAWAN, BIHAR, PATNA.
9. THE DY. SECRETARY, MINOR IRRIGATION
DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA.
10. THE PROJECT COORDINATOR, TUBE WELL
PROJECT, BISHVESHARIYA, BHAWAN,
BIHAR, PATNA.
11. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (NORTH), TUBE WELL
PROJECT, MUZAFFARPUR.
12. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, TUBE
WELL CIRCLE, DAMUCHAK ROAD,
MUZAFFARPUR.
...(Respondents No.1 to 12)...Appellants.
Versus
1. CHHEDI PRASAD SINHA, SON OF LATE
SURYADEO LAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-
LAKHANPUR, P.S. LAURIYA, DISTRICT-
WEST CHAMPARAN AT PRESENT RESIDING
IN THE MOHALLA CHANDMANI, P.O.
MOTIHARI, P.S.-MOTIHARI TOWN,
DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN.
....(Petitioner)....Respondent 1st Party.
-2-
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR WATER
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DAROGA
PRASAD RAI PATH, SRI KRISHNAPURI,
PATNA.
....(Respondent No.13)....Respondent 2nd party.
3. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
....(Respondent No.14)....Respondent 3rd party.
Counsel for the Appellants : Mr. Anil Kumar Jha,
G.A. No.2.
Counsel for the respondents : Mr. S.P. Srivastava.
-----------
5 30.9.2010 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned counsel for the respondents.
We were taken through the Division Bench
Judgment of this court in CWJC No.6298 of 1988 passed on
05.04.1989. That judgment was followed in another writ
petition bearing CWJC No.5826 of 1988 which was disposed
of on 26.02.1990. The writ petitioner has claimed to be a co-
petitioner in CWJC No.5826 of 1988 which was filed on
behalf of the association. The issue settled by those two
judgments of the Division Bench is to the effect that
petitioner and similarly situated employees continued to be
employees of the Minor Irrigation Department and were
rightly granted time bound promotion by the said
Department. Cancellation of time bound promotions through
orders dated 7.6.1988 and 5.8.1988 on the ground that
petitioner and similarly situated employees had become
-3-
employees of the Finance Department was not accepted by
the Division Bench till the year 1989-90.
The State accepted those decisions and
thereafter there is no further material to hold that the position
changed making the writ petitioner employee of the Finance
Department.
Learned writ Court has considered all the
relevant facts and has rightly relied upon the aforesaid two
judgments of the Division Bench to hold that the writ
petitioner being a permanent employee of the Minor
Irrigation Department was entitled and was rightly paid the
scale of head clerk of the said Department. On that account a
direction has been given for re-fixation of the retiral benefits
of the petitioner within a fixed period.
We find no good reason to interfere with the
order of the writ court. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
No cost.
(Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)
( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)
sk/pn