IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6003 of 2009 1. Surya Mohan Jha, Son of Shri Shri Narayan Jha, Resident of Village-Manik Chak, P.S.-Runni Saidpur, District-Sitamarhi, at present District President of Bihar State Village Level Worker’s Association, Sitamarhi. 2. Binay Kant Pathak, Son of Shri Surya Kant Pathak, Resident of Village-Bathnaha, P.S.-Bathnaha, District-Sitamarhi, at present District Secretary of Bihar State VLW Association, Sitamarhi. 3. Navin Kumar, Son of Shri Chandra Narayan Lal, Resident of Village-Pokharbhira, P.S.-Pupri, District-Sitamarhi. 4. Anand Kishore Sharan, Son of Shri Raj Nandan Sharan, Resident of Village and P.S.-Runni Saidpur, District- Sitamarhi. 5. Jai Narayan Jha, Son of Shri Rama Kant Jha, Resident of Village-Rewasi, P.S.-Riga, District-Sitamarhi. 6. Vijay Kumar, Son of Shri Ramji Kumar, Resident of Village-Chak Mahila, P.S. and District-Sitamarhi. 7. Ashok Kumar, Son of Shri Ramashish Paswan, Resident of Village-Sonbarsa Tola, P.S.-Pupri, District- Sitamarhi. 8. Devendra Pandey, Son of Shri Ram Bilas Pandey, Resident of Village-Belmohan, P.S.-Janakpur Road, District-Sitamarhi. 9. Umesh Nandan Singh, Son of Shri Brahmdeo Singh, Resident of Village-Ranjit Pur, P.S. and District- Sitamarhi. 10. Chakradhar Jha, Son of Late Kashi Nath Jha, Resident of Village-Manik Chak, P.S.-Runni Saidpur, District- Sitamarhi. ……………………………………….. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the Agriculture Produce Commissioner, Agriculture Department, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Agriculture Education Council, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Joint Secretary, Agriculture Department, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Director, Agriculture Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. The Deputy Director, Agriculture (Education), Mithapur Farm, Bihar, Patna. 7. The Collector, Town and District-Sitamarhi. 8. The District Agriculture Officer, Sitamarhi. 9. the Establishment Deputy Collector, Sitamarhi, District-Sitamarhi. ………………………………………………. Respondents -------------- 2 2. 14.5.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the State. In this writ application the prayer of the petitioners reads as follows: “(i) For issuance of an appropriate direction, order or writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to promote the petitioners to the post of Block Agriculture Officer or its equivalent post with all consequential benefits, at least from the date their juniors were promoted ignoring the seniority of these petitioners. (ii) For further issuance of an appropriate direction, order or writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to restore the seniority of these petitioners after the aforesaid promotion.” Mr. Kripanand Jha, counsel for the petitioners, with reference to the aforementioned prayer would submit that in absence of any prescribed procedure the Respondent authority have resorted to a method of pick and choose in giving promotion to Jansevak on the post of Block Agriculture Officer (B.A.O.). He would also submit that while doing so the petitioners 3 have been altogether ignored whereas the juniors to them have already been given such promotion. Counsel for the petitioner, on the basis of Annexure 1, rules relating to the appointment on the post of Jansewak, had submitted that there was no provision for promotion on the post of B.A.O. in the said rules. In the opinion of this Court the aforesaid rule is not expected to contain provisions for promotional post and infact such provision can only be found in the rules framed, if any, for the recruitment/promotion on the post of Block Agriculture Officer. So far grievance of the petitioner as with regard to juniors to him being promoted is concerned, this Court would find that as none of the alleged juniors have been made party to this writ application, this Court can also not decide this issue. The allegation of pick and choose or acting in defiance of the settled principles of seniority in the gradation list of Jansevak, infact could have been looked into in an effective manner if the petitioners could have moved before the departmental head in 4 stead of filing a representation directly to the Chief Minister. That being so, this Court would give liberty to the petitioners to move afresh by filing a fresh representation to the Agriculture Production Commissioner cum Principal Secretary of the Agriculture Department (Respondent no. 2) and in such representation the petitioners in their individual capacity (not by virtue of their being office bearers of the Association) would highlight as to who amongst their juniors have been promoted without following any norms. In the event such a representation is filed by the petitioners, the same shall receive due consideration of respondent no.2 who is expected to dispose it of by a reasoned order within a period of four months from the date of its filing. With the aforementioned observation and direction this application stands final disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/