Pay protection under Bihar Service Code Rule-78 is restricted to State Government employees and not applicable to Central Government employees joining through fresh recruitment.

JUDGMENT :

Harish Kumar, J.

Heard Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Pushkar Bhardwaj, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Gopal Krishna, learned Advocate for the State.

2. The question for consideration in the present writ petition is, as to whether the petitioner, who had been serving East Central Railway at Patna, on being selected for the post of Assistant in the Establishment of the Patna High Court, Patna in pursuant to an advertisement was entitled to the benefit of pay protection in terms with the provisions contained under Rule-78 of Bihar Service Code.

3. Before coming to the impugned order(s), it would be pertinent to give the short facts of the case, in the premise of which, the present writ petition came to be filed.

(i) The petitioner after facing due process, on being duly selected, was appointed against the post of Chemical & Metallurgical Assistant-II, in the East Central Railway in the Grade Pay of Rs.5000-8000/- vide Office Order dated 12.12.2001 (Annexure-1). During the service tenure, the petitioner was posted at Work Shop Project under East Central Railway at Patna, in the meanwhile, in pursuant to Advertisement No.1/2010 issued by the Authority of the Establishment of the Patna High Court, Patna, the petitioner after procuring “No Objection Certificate”, from the concerned authority, participated in the process of selection for the post of Assistant in the Establishment of the Patna High Court, Patna. On being found successful, vide letter dated 08.08.2011 (Annexure-3), the petitioner was informed with respect to his selection for appointment against the post of Assistant in the revised pay structure having Pay Band-2 of Rs.9300-34800/-plus Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-.

(ii) Subsequent upon the appointment of the petitioner, he was relieved from his duties in the Indian Railways and thus he submitted his joining as Assistant; the basic salary payable in favour of the petitioner upon his joining in the capacity of an Assistant was fixed at Rs.12540/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/-; however, while continuing in the capacity of Chemical & Metallurgical Assistant-II, in the East Central Railway, till month of October, 2011, the basic salary admissible in favour of the petitioner was fixed at Rs.14920/-.

(iii) The petitioner aggrieved with the action of the respondent authorities of the Establishment of the Patna High Court, Patna as also the Government of Bihar, submitted a representation dated 14.01.2016, requesting therein to extend him the benefits of pay protection and also to take steps towards processing the transfer of Provident Fund Account, which had remained with the Indian Railways. The representation was duly sent to the concerned authorities under the Law Department of the State Government. The service history as well as service- book and appointment letter etc. were called for to examine the claim of the petitioner at the level of the Finance Department of the State Government.

(iv) Following due deliberation, letter no.423 dated 23.01.2017 was issued by the Law Department of the State Government, by which the opinion expressed by the Finance Department of the State Government was communicated to the Registrar Establishment, Patna High Court, informing him that the petitioner was not entitled to the benefit of pay protection in terms with Rule-78 of Bihar Service Code. The aforesaid letter clearly postulates that said rule was applicable only in cases of State Government employee(s) and not extended