The court ruled that employment discrimination necessitates rectification, confirming entitlement to benefits based on qualifications and prior rulings.

JUDGMENT :

(PURNENDU SINGH, J.)

Heard Mr. Amaresh Kumar Singh, learned counsel along with Mr. Dineshwar Prasad Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Apurva Kumar, learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ petition has sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is reproduced hereinafter:-

“(i) Issuance of an order, direction, writ in the nature of certiorari quashing that part of the memos no. 747 dated 14.12.2015 and 04 dated 02.01.2016 both issued by RDDE, Purnea by which the petitioner had been given appointment in class III post from the date of joining and the past services on class iv post has been Counted only for pensionary purpose.

(ii) Issuance of direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to treat the petitioner to be in service on a class III post from the date of his initial appointment on class IV post, with due monetary benefits.

(iii) Issuance of a direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities to grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioner after fixing his date of appointment of class III post w.e.f 07.02.2003.

(iv) Issuance of any other appropriate order for which the petitioner would be found entitled under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that after the death of the father of the petitioner in harness on 30.04.1998, while he was working as Assistant Teacher in Primary School, Dasgram, P.S.-Barari, Katihar, the petitioner had made an application for considering him to be appointed on compassionate ground. The case of the petitioner was considered by the District Compassionate Committee in its meeting held on 21.05.2002 along with other applicants from which one Ms. Dolly Mamta, the daughter of Late Santoshi Mery who was serving at Primary Health Centre, Mahihari was recommended for Class-III post and she was appointed on the said Class-III post. The petitioner’s father was Assistant Teacher and in spite of the fact that the petitioner having all the requisite qualification for being appointed on Class-III post in accordance with the governing Rules of Appointment of teachers and Circular of the State Government issued in this regard, the petitioner was discriminated and he was appointed on Class-IV post w.e.f. 07.02.2003. The petitioner being discriminated filed C.W.J.C. No. 11735 of 2005 which was heard on 10.02.2012. This Court having perused the recommendation dated 21.05.2002 and the order of this Court dated 22.03.2005 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 9982 of 2002 (Quajee Md. Hussain Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) observed that while making recommendation dated 21.05.2002, authorities were not justified in recommending Ms. Dolly Mamta for appointment on Class-III post and the petitioner’s appointment on Class-IV post when both were qualified for Class-III post. This Court directed the State-respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for granting him Class-III appointment or to take steps for reversion of Ms. Dolly Mamta on Class-IV post after giving notice to her. It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that the authority concerned took corrective measures and appointed the petitioner on Class-III post on 14.12.2015 (Annexure-3), however, the petitioner has not been given pay protection and has sought interference with the Office Order contained in Memo Nos. 747 dated 14.12.2015 and 04 dated 02.01.2016 both issued by RDDE, Purnea to the extent that the petitioner is entitled for pay protection from the initial date of