Letters Patent Appeal No.543 OF 2000 Against the Judgement and order dated 9th March 200 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11965 of 1998. ------------------ MAKESHWAR PRASAD--------------------------------------------------(Appellant) Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS----------------------------------------(Respondents) For the Appellant : M/s. S.K. Verma, Sr. Advocate,Sri J.Kishore Verma, For the Respondent : ---------- P R E S E N T The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Barin Ghosh The Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.N. Singh Barin Ghosh & J.N.Singh, JJ The Statutes for promotion of Demonstrators to the post of Lecturers was approved by the Chancellor on 18th November, 1980 and the same was there upon amended first on 15th September, 1981 and lastly on 22nd December, 1986. The said Statute provided that cases of Demonstrators who are in the service of the University or of the college concerned, as the case may be, shall be considered for promotion to the post of Lecturer. The Statute makes it clear that in order to be considered for such promotion, if the person concerned has put in at least 12 years of continuous service as Demonstrator, he shall be deemed to be eligible for promotion as Lecturer, if he at least holds a IInd class Master’s Degree and fulfils other conditions as prescribed in the Statute. The concession of holding a IInd Class Master’s Degree according to the said Statute, is not available to a Demonstrator, who is not in continuous service of 12 years. The question of promotion of Demonstrators to the post of - 2 - Lecturers will be taken up only when there are vacancies in the post of Lecturers and accordingly an effort can be made for the purpose of finding out which of the demonstrators may be accorded such promotions when there are ascertained vacancies. The Government on 23rd February, 1988 decided that if a demonstrator is working for a period of 12 years and if he is qualified to be appointed as Assistant Lecturer/Assistant Professor, the demonstrator shall be accorded the benefits of promotion to the post of Assistant Lecturer/Assistant Professor even if no such post is available by making available to such demonstrator the financial benefits attached to the promotional post. The appellant had 12 years of service as Demonstrator as on 31st January 1991 in B.I.T. Sindri, Dhanbad , but he was not accorded promotion in terms of the said decision of the Government dated 23rd of February 1988 and accordingly he approached this Court by filing a writ petition. In the writ petition the State pointed out that in terms of the law then prevalent, in order to be appointed as an Assistant Lecturer/Assistant Professor, the incumbent should have at least Ist class in Post Graduation and the same is said to have been settled on the basis of the decision of AICTE dated 20.9.1989 as accepted by the State Government on 16.2.1990 and in as much as the appellant did not have a Ist Class Post Graduation, the appellant was not accorded promotion on the basis of the decision dated 23rd February, 1988. Accepting such contention to be valid, the writ petition has been dismissed by the judgement and order under appeal. - 3 - Before us the learned counsel for the appellant contended by referring to the Statute mentioned above that the appellant was qualified for being appointed as Assistant Lecturer/Assistant Professor. The Statute referred to above entails a IInd class Post Graduation coupled with service of 12 years as Demonstrator consideration for promotion to the post of Lecturer, but not consideration for appointment to the post of lecturer. As aforesaid consideration for promotion would arise when there are ascertained vacancies; whereas the decision of the Government dated 23rd February 1988 entails a promotion as a matter of course, even if there is no vacancy, but for that the person concerned is required to have the qualification to be appointed as Assistant Lecturer/Assistant Professor, and not the qualification for being promoted from the post of demonstrator to the post of lecturer. The Statute deals a particular field and the decision of the Government dated 23rd February, 1988 deals a different field. No part of the statute can therefore have a bearing, on the said decision of the Government. In such view of the matter there is no scope of interference. The appeal fails and the same is dismissed. Patna High Court 8.7.2008/NAFR Rahman/ (Barin Ghosh) (J. N. Singh) - 4 -