Balmiki Kumar vs State Of Bihar Through The Chief And Ors

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

The grievance of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Constable in pursuance to Advertisement No. 1 of 1998. He participated in the selection

process, but, was not appointed. Thereafter, the petitioner moved this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1304 of 2003 along with one Ravindra Kumar Singh and

by order, dated 29.09.2004, this Court allowed the writ petition with a direction that if the petitioner possesses the requisite height in his category if the

vacancy existed a direction was issued for consideration of the petitioner. In pursuance thereto the petitioner was remeasured and appointed on

29.12.2005. The petitioner in the present writ application seeks a direction for grant of seniority/increment from the date when other persons have

been appointed in pursuance to Advertisement no. 1 of 1998 with effect from 05.01.2000, as has been given to other persons. He submits that

Ravindra Kumar Singh who had moved this Court along with the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 1304 of 2003 has been granted seniority/increment by

Nawadah District Order No. 148 of 2012 with effect from 05.01.2000, dated 28.01.2012, as contained in Annexure 9. He, further, submits that the

Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011, mandates all similarly situated employee should be granted the benefit of covered matters and if orders of the

Court has been implemented in the case of certain litigants, it should be implemented in respect of all other identically situated persons and refers to a

Full Bench Judgment in the case of Amresh Kumar Singh Vrs. The State of Biahr & Ors., since reported in 2018(2) P.L.J.R., 929, special reference

being made to paragraph 8.

Learned counsel for the State has filed its counter affidavit wherein Nawadah District Order No. 86 of 2010 has been placed at Annexure ‘E’

in which a decision has been taken to grant the benefit of seniority and increment to all persons appointed in pursuance to Advertisement No. 1 of

1998 with effect from 05.01.2000 except the period during which they have not worked would be counted as no work no pay. At paragraph 8, it has

been stated, in the counter affidavit, that steps are being taken to decide the seniority of the petitioner and to provide increment, but, he would not be

entitled to salary for the said period between 05.01.2000 to 28.12.2005 in view of the order, dated 21.08.2009, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 10253 of 2009.

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not press for payment of salary, but, seeks seniority and increment from the date the other Constables have

been given who were appointed in pursuance to Advertisement no. 1 of 1998.

Considering the facts and circumstances, the fact remains that some persons, who had joined later, like the petitioner, have been granted

seniority/increment and, thus, in view of the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011, which mandates all similarly situated employees should be granted the

benefit of covered matters and, thus, there is no reason to go into the legal question involved as the case of the petitioner is covered by the decision as

placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Annexure 9 and the Nawadah District Order No. 86 of 2010, as contained in Annexure ‘E’ of

the counter affidavit also stipulates the same.

This writ application is allowed with a direction to respondent no. 4, the Superintendent of Police, Nawadah, to consider the case of the petitioner as

per the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011, granting similar benefit to the petitioner as granted in respect of other identically situated persons, within a

period of three months, from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.