Back
2021 Supreme(Pat) 674
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.
Basant Singh & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar & Ors. - Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14818 of 2015
Decided On : 31-08-2021
Mr. Shivendra Kishore, Senior Advocate, Mr. Jai Kishore Poddar, Mr. Saroj Kumar, for the Appellant; Ms. Archana Meenakshi (GP 6), for the Respondent.
Headnote:
Service Law – Compensatory Appointment of Land Losers – Non-regularisation of service – Petitioners are seeking direction to respondents to shift back date of their appointment with effect from date when they were initially appointed on ad hoc basis and give them benefit of continuity of service with all consequential benefits including difference of salary after deducting amounts already paid to them and benefits of pension and gratuity under the scheme as was applicable to employees of State Government prior to 2005 – Assurance of State Government to grant benefit of employment to displaced persons meant such employment, which could be retained by Government – It could not give assurance, nor could ensure retention of ad hoc employment, which is given only for doing emergent necessary work, required to be done for a temporary period – For their own laches and delay caused by respondents in issuing necessary order converting ad hoc/daily wage employment of petitioners to permanent establishment, respondents are resisting claim of petitioners for counting their past service for all purposes including for the purpose of computing of period of their past service for different benefits against various heads – This Court's order for converting their ad hoc employment to permanent Establishment was passed much before 01.09.2005 with effect from which, new pension scheme came into force – Recognizing fundamental right to life of oustees under Article 21 of Constitution, State of Bihar had prepared a plan in form of policy decision to employ oustees in government service, which officials/respondents failed to honour – Despite this Court's order, officials declined petitioners their rightful claim on one pretext on the other – A right accrued to petitioners with passing of order dated 15.04.2005, whereby respondents were commanded to consider converting of ad hoc employment of petitioners into permanent establishment, denial of which was found by Court to be arbitrary – Petitioners cannot be blamed for delay caused in issuance of order by Chief Engineer in this regard – In no circumstance, they should be denied notional benefit of shifting the date of their regular appointment – Petitioners held entitled to pensionary benefits, in accordance with Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 for computation of which their past service on ad hoc basis shall be computed, for the purpose of qualifying pensionary service to the extent of ten years. (Paras 11, 19 to 24)
JUDGMENT
1. This matter has been taken up for hearing online because of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.
2. Heard Mr. Shivendra Kishore, learned Senior Counsel with Mr. Jai Krishna Poddar and Mr. Suraj Kumar for the petitioners and Mrs. Archana Meenakshee, learned G.P.- 6 for the State of Bihar.
3. There are 45 petitioners in the present application. Petitioners No. 18, 22 and 33 died during the pendency of this application and have been substituted by their legal representatives for pursing this matter.
4. The facts of the case are not at all in dispute. The Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, had acquired huge chunk of land from several persons in and around 1979 for Durgawati Dam Project, situate in the district of Kaimur, Bihar. Consequent upon acquisition of land, many persons had become landless or lost substantial area of their land, rendering them jobless. It appears from an order of this Court dated 15.04.2005 passed by a coordinate Bench in C.W.J.C. No. 1760 of 2000 (Basant Singh and Others vs. The State of Bihar and Others), filed by these petitioners that the State Government of Bihar had passed a resolution containing policy relating to appointment of persons got displaced because of acquisition of land for execution of different projects under the Water Resources Department. The resolution provided, inter alia, that the persons, who would be displaced for implementation of the project under the Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, must be rehabilitated by providing an employment. It was decided that one employment shall be allowed for each of the family displaced. The Government also decided, in the said policy, that the first preference for the employment shall be given to such families, which had lost all the lands belonging to the families, then those which has lost 75 percent of its lands and thereafter to the families, which has lost 50 percent of its lands.
5. The petitioners claim that their families had lost 100 percent of their lands in the acquisition for execution of said Durgawati Dam Project. They were listed as such and were also given appointment by the Government, but on ad hoc basis. As services of the petitioners were being not regularized and their services were being taken on ad hoc basis only for several years, they approached this Court by filing the said writ application registered as C.W.J.C. No. 1760 of 2000. A coordinate Bench of this Court, in its decision dated 15.04.2005 in case of Basant Singh (supra) filed by the petitioners held as under : -
"...Be that as it may, the aforesaid representation in the policy regarding employment of displaced persons because of execution of different projects under Water Resources Department, was a representation about an employment which the government was competent to retain and accordingly, the government could only give an employment in its establishment to such displaced persons, in as much as only such employment could be retained by the government. It could not give assurance, nor could ensure retention of an adhoc employment, which is given only for doing emergent necessary work, required to be done for a temporary period. "
6. After having held as above, the Court directed the State respondents in case of Basant Singh (supra) to consider within 12 weeks from the date of service of a copy of the order upon respondent No. 1 of that case to convert ad hoc/daily wage employment of the petitioners into permanent appointment in its permanent establishment.
7. Taking exception to the decision rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Basant Singh (supra), the State of Bihar preferred an appeal under the Letters Patent of this Court giving rise to L.P.A. No. 875 of 2006. The said L.P.A. No. 875 of 2006 (State of Bihar and Others vs. Basant Singh and Others) came to be dismissed by a judgment and order of a Division Bench of this Court dated 22.07.2010, which has been brought on record by way of Annexure-4 to this writ ap
