Kameshwar Sahu vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 2776 Jhar

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    W.P.(S). No. 974 of 2021
      1. Kameshwar Sahu
      2. Raj Kumar Prasad                            ...   Petitioners
                             Versus
      1. The State of Jharkhand
      2. The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of
          Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi
      3. The Principal Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms and
          Rajbhasha Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at
          Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi
      4. Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner -cum- Special
          Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Bhawan,
          Dhurwa, Ranchi
                                                                  ...

Respondents ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

---

      For the Petitioners        : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate
      For the State              : Mr. Nehru Mahto, AC to G.P. IV
                                                           ---
      Order No. 05                                   Dated 10th August, 2023

      I.A. No. 3941 of 2023

Heard the learned counsel for the respective sides. This application has been preferred by the petitioners for amending the prayer portion of the writ application in view of the subsequent development which had taken place during the pendency of this writ application.

In the writ application, the petitioners have prayed for a direction upon the respondents to grant them promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer.

It appears that the petitioners have been promoted in the meantime to the post of Assistant Engineer with effect from 22.03.2023 though the petitioners claim that their promotion should be made effective from 10.07.2006.

Considering the fact that the prayer made in the instant application is in continuation with the prayer made in the main writ application, the same is allowed.

Let the I.A. No. 3941 of 2023 be treated as part of the main writ application.

W.P.(S). No. 974 of 2021 In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction upon the respondents for grant of promotion to them from the post of Junior Engineer to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil). By virtue of I.A. No. 3941 of 2023 having been allowed by this Court the petitioners have also prayed for quashing of limited part of the order of promotion dated 22.03.2023 whereby

promotion though has been granted to the petitioners, but the same has been made applicable from the date when the petitioners gave their joining to the promoted post of Assistant Engineer with a further prayer directing upon the respondents to grant the benefit of promotion to the petitioners of the post of Assistant Engineer retrospectively with effect from the date from which they have been directed to work as Incharge Assistant Engineer i.e. with effect tom 10.07.2006 along with all financial benefits.

The case of the petitioners therefore is that their date of promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) should be shifted from 22.03.2023 to 10.07.2006.

Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that with respect to their grievance regarding shifting of date of promotion, they have already preferred a representation before the respondent No. 2, but the same has not yet been acted upon. He submits that a direction be issued to the respondent No. 2 to pass an appropriate order on the representation considering the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 2358 of 2010 as also the judgments passed in LAP No. 79 of 2022 and LPA No. 735 of 2019.

Learned AC to GP IV submits that the petitioners should file a fresh representation annexing all the documents for appropriate consideration by the respondent No. 2.

Regard being had to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective sides, this writ application stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to submit a fresh representation before respondent No. 2 within a period of three weeks along with all relevant documents and/ or orders/ judgments in support of their case. If such representation is filed, the respondent No. 2 shall look into it and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date of submission of the representation.

It goes without saying that if the claim, of the petitioners are found to be genuine, necessary order should follow immediately upon the disposal of the representation.

This writ application stands disposed of. Pending I.A. also stands disposed of.

(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY,J.) MK