IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10847 of 2010 1. DR. PRAMOD KUMAR SINHA, S/O SRI L.D. MOHAN, AT PRESENT POSTED AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (MEDICINE), A.N.M. MEDICAL COLLEGE, GAYA. 2. DR. ASHOK KUMAR, S/O SRI UDAY NARAYAN SINHA, AT PRESENT POSTED AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (MEDICINE), PATNA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL, PATNA. 3. DR. RAM DAYAL SINGH, S/O LATE BRICHH SINGH AT PRESENT POSTED AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (MEDICINE), PATNA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL, PATNA. 4. DR. HIMANSHU KUMAR, S/O SRI MAN MOHAN MISHRA AT PRESENT POSTED AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (MEDICINE), PATNA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL, PATNA. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND FAMILY WELFARE GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 4. DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 5. DR. RAHUL KUMAR, S/O NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, AT PRESENT POSTED AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (MEDICINE), A.N.M MEDICAL COLLEGE, GAYA. --------- Respondents For the Petitioners :- Mr. Chittaranjan Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Akashdeep, Adv. For the State :- Mr. Ashok Kumar Pathak, AC to GP-XI For the Respondent No.5 :- Mr. Banwari Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shiv Kumar, Adv. ----------- 11 5.5.2011 The four petitioners in this case have assailed an order dated 21.4.2010, whereby and whereunder, the respondent no.5, who was earlier placed at serial no.57 of the seniority list, has been sought to be brought above the petitioners by placing him at 2 serial no. 34A, whereas, the petitioners were at serial nos. 54, 48, 50 & 56 respectively. Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, would submit that such seniority in the final gradation list dated 8.7.2008 was issued on the basis of the date of appointment of the Assistant Professor/Senior Resident and the same could not have been varied for a reason namely acquiring experience at the stage of Senior Residency in a medical college. It has also been contended that such seniority, which has a direct bearing for consideration of the cases of the petitioners on the next higher post of Associate Professor, has been sought to be adversely affected without giving them any notice and/or opportunity of hearing. In this case Mr. Banwari Sharma, while defending the impugned order, has submitted that there are number of judicial precedents to suggest that the period of teaching experience acquired by a person in course of his being Senior Resident will have to be taken into account for the purposes of reckoning the seniority in a teaching cadre 3 of medical college. He, however, is not in a position to deny this aspect that when the impugned order dated 21.4.2010 was issued placing the respondent no.5 above the petitioners, the petitioners were not given any notice and/or opportunity of hearing. By now, it is well settled that a seniority acquired after publication of final gradation list cannot be changed without notice. Reference in this connection may be made to a judgment of this Court in the case of Ganesh Chandra Jha Vs. Steel Authority of India reported in 1992(1) PLJR 165 wherein it has been held that seniority is a civil right and if by any reason seniority of a person is affected, he is entitled to a notice. Such revision in the final gradation list without notice and/or opportunity of hearing to the petitioners had definitely sought to adversely affect them and, therefore, even if for any reason whatsoever, the final gradation list was sought to be changed, the persons placed above the respondent no.5, who were going to be affected by change of the seniority of the 4 respondent no.5, were required to be given notice and/or opportunity of hearing. That having been not done, this Court will have no option but, to quash the impugned order dated 21.4.2010 contained in Annexure-7 to this writ application. As the issue of seniority between the petitioners and the respondent no.5 will still have a bearing in their future promotion on the post of Associate Professor and Professor, this Court would remit the matter back to the Principal Secretary, Health for re-determining the seniority of the respondent no.5 vis-à-vis petitioners after giving notice and/or opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. As a matter of fact, the interest of justice would be better served if all the persons placed between serial no. 34A to serial no.56 including the petitioners and the respondent no.5 are given notice and/or opportunity of hearing for placing their cases as against the proposed revision in the seniority of the respondent no.5. The principal Secretary, Health may, therefore, 5 issue notice to all such persons who are still in service amongst serial nos. 35 to 56 of the final gradation list dated 8.7.2008 and, thereafter, having also affording them an opportunity of personal hearing, decide the inter-se seniority by a speaking order within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It goes without saying that this Court has expressed no opinion on the merit of the case of the petitioners or the respondent no.5. It is also made clear that any interim order passed earlier in this case shall also stand vacated. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)