PANKAJ KUMAR versus STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

Citation: [2021] 8 S.C.R. 537 · Decided: 19-08-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: UDAY UMESH LALIT · Disposal: Leave Granted & Disposed off

cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
537
PANKAJ KUMAR
v.
STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No(s). 4864 of 2021)
AUGUST 19, 2021
[UDAY UMESH LALIT AND AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.]
Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000: ss. 72, 73 and 74 – Provisions
relating to services in Bihar and Jharkhand – Benefit of reservation
– Entitlement to – Person resident of the State of Bihar – Order of
1950, identifying castes/tribes whereby benefit extended to members
of SC/ST throughout the integrated State of Bihar – Subsequently
State of Bihar bifurcated into two successor States, State of Bihar
and State of Jharkhand with rights and privileges to the extent being
protected by 2000 Act – Said persons, if could still be considered to
be a migrant to the successor State of Jharkhand depriving them of
their privileges and benefits of reservation for public employment
to which the incumbent or their lineal descendants has availed in
the integrated State of Bihar – Held: Person is entitled to claim
benefit of reservation in either of the successor State of Bihar or
State of Jharkhand, but will not be entitled to claim priveleges and
benefit of reservation simultaneously in both the successor States
since that would defeat the mandate of Arts 341(1) and 342(1) –
Those who are members of the reserved category and are resident
of the successor State of Bihar, while participating in open selection
in State of Jharkhand would be treated to be migrants and it would
be open to participate in general category without claiming the
benefit of reservation and vice-versa – s. 73 postulates not only to
protect the existing service conditions but the benefit of reservation
and privileges which he was enjoying on or before the appointed
day, in the State of Bihar not to be varied to his disadvantage after
he became a member of service in the State of Jharkhand – In view
thereof, it would be highly unfair and pernicious to their interest if
the benefits of reservation with privileges and benefits flowing
thereof are not being protected in the State of Jharkhand after the
incumbent is absorbed – Employees who were in public employment
in the State of Bihar on or before the appointed day, apart from
those who are domicile of either of the district which became part of
[2021] 8 S.C.R. 537
537
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
538
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 8 S.C.R.
the State of Jharkhand, such of the employees who have submitted
their option to serve the State of Jharkhand, their existing service
conditions shall not be varied to their disadvantage and stands
protected by virtue of s. 73 – Such of the employees who are members
of the SC/ST/OBC whose caste/tribe has been notified, benefit of
reservation including privileges and benefits flowing thereof, would
be protected by virtue of s. 73 for all practical purposes which can
be claimed (including by their wards) for participation in public
employment – Constitution (Scheduled Castes)/(Scheduled Tribes)
Order 1950.
Disposing of the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 By introducing the Bihar Re-organisation Act,
2000, so far as the conditions of service of the serving employees
is concerned, are indeed being protected by virtue of Section 73
read with Section 74 under Part VIII of the Act 2000 which clearly
provides that such of the employees who were appointed
immediately before the appointed date holding or discharging
duties of any post or office in connection with the affairs of the
existing State of Bihar in any area now falling in the successor
State of Jharkhand shall continue to hold the same post or office
in the successor State provided option has been exercised to
remain in the State of Bihar, they shall be deemed to be duly
appointed to the post or office of the successor State. As a
consequence, such of the employees who are working
immediately on or before the appointed date, i.e. 15th November,
2000 in those 18 districts which have been formed part of the
State of Jharkhand in terms of Section 3 of the Act be deemed to
be appointed in the respective successor State of Jharkhand, with
their service conditions not to be varied to his disadvantage
except with the previsous approval of the Central Government.
[Para 48][564-B-E]
1.2 The scheme of the Act 2000 postulates that employees
who are working immediately on or before the appointed date, in
the State of Bihar, has either domicile of the districts that formed
part of State of Jharkhand under Section 3 of the Act or opted or
joined being junior in their respective seniority, stands absorbed
in t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.