W.P. (S) No.2866 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 2866 of 2024 Rajani Kumari, aged about 35 years, wife of Sri Anil Kumar, resident of C 23 / 24, Sachivalaya Colony, Hinoo, Near Paani Tanki, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. – Doranda, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834002. ... Petitioner Versus 1. State of Jharkhand, through Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. – Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834004. 2. Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834004. 3. Secretary, Water Resource Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. – Nepal House, P.S. – Doranda, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834002. 4. Under Secretary, Water Resource Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. – Nepal house, P.S. – Doranda, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834002. 5. Engineer-in-Chief I, Water Resource Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. – Nepal House, P.S. – Doranda, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834002. … Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Rishabh Raj, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, S.C.-IV Mr. Suman Marandi, A.C. to SC-IV --------- Reserved on: 23.01.2025 Pronounced on: 12/02/2025 Per M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J. 1. The petitioner is a Junior Engineer (Mechanical) in the Water Resource Department of the Government of Jharkhand and she had been recommended for appointment by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission in 2013. 2. The next higher post to the post of Junior Engineer is the post of Assistant Engineer in the said Department. Page 2 of 7 W.P. (S) No.2866 of 2024 3. It is not in dispute that 62% of the posts of Assistant Engineer are required to be filled by direct recruitment, 10% by way of promotion through what was referred to as ‘AMIE Quota’ and the balance 28% through a regular promotion. 4. In this writ petition, we are concerned with the promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) from the post of Junior Engineer (Mechanical) in the 10% AMIE Quota. 5. In the AMIE Quota, in-service Junior Engineers who have passed the Associate Member of Institution of Engineers (AMIE) examination, or who possess an equivalent qualification and who have also put in a minimum 5 years of service would be considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer. 6. Prior to formation of the State of Jharkhand, when the area which currently forms the State of Jharkhand, was part of the State of Bihar, a resolution dt. 22.07.1998 contained in Memo No.E3/P1-A-8-916/93-500(S) was issued by the Road Construction Department of the Government of Bihar. The said Department, as a nodal agency for all Works Department of the said Government, introduced the qualification of AMIE or equivalent for the promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer in the 10% quota making the change from the previous resolution of 1979 which had prescribed graduation in Engineering or equivalent. 7. After the State of Jharkhand was formed in 2000, a resolution dt. 26.05.2004 contained in Memo No.1657(S) was issued reiterating the same quota for direct recruitment, normal promotion and AMIE Quota. 8. In 2009, a resolution dt. 01.09.2009 contained in Memo.4377(S) was issued by the Government of Jharkhand modifying the resolution dt. 22.07.1998. This is filed as Annexure 4 in the writ petition. Through this resolution, by way of Clause ‘Ga’, benefit of AMIE Quota was made equally available to Junior Engineer (Mechanical) who W.P. (S) No.2866 of 2024 already possessed said qualification as on the date of their appointment/joining service as Junior Engineer in the same way as it was available to those who obtained it in the course of their service. 9. Petitioner had enrolled with the Institution of Engineers, Kolkata, in order to obtain the AMIE qualification and she successfully cleared the Section A Exam for the said qualification in 2013 and Section B in Mechanical Engineering branch in 2015 and obtained AMIE Qualification in 2015 i.e., after she joined service as Junior Engineer. She completed 5 years of continuous service in the cadre of Junior Engineer (Mechanical) in 2018. 10. She contends that in the final gradation list of Junior Engineer (Mechanical) notified by the Water Resource Department through an order dt. 03.10.2018 indicating the inter se seniority of Junior Engineers for the purpose of regular promotion to the post of Assistant Engineers, she was placed at serial No.78. 11. Thereafter, another final gradation list was issued on 28.03.2023 through Memo No.1783 of Junior Engineers (Mechanical) who possessed AMIE or equivalent qualification. 12. Petitioner does not dispute that prior to the notification of the final gradation list of the Junior Engineers through the proceeding dt. 28.03.2023, there was also a provisional gradation list issued inviting objections. But the petitioner does not state that she had filed any objection to the provisional gradation list. 13. Petitioner contends that in the final gradation list of Junior Engineers dt. 28.03.2023, on the basis of the resolution dt. 01.09.2009, several persons who had obtained AMIE or equivalent qualification before joining services as Junior Engineers were included and that, this ought not to be done. 14. According to the petitioner, had this not been done by the respondents, she would not have been placed at Serial No.22 in the final W.P. (S) No.2866 of 2024 gradation list dt. 28.03.2023, much below the actual position in which she ought to have been, had the gradation list been drawn only containing Junior Engineers who obtained AMIE or equivalent qualification after joining service. 15. Petitioner claims to have made certain representations to the respondents complaining of injustice to her, but there was no action taken and, therefore, she had filed the instant writ petition. 16. Petitioner contends that portions to the resolutions dt. 22.07.1998 and 01.09.2009 to the extent that they extended the benefit of promotion in the 10% AMIE Quota to even Junior Engineers who obtained the AMIE or its equivalent qualification before entering service is arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory and is in violation of Article 14 and should be struck down; and consequently, the order dt. 28.03.2023 drawing up a final gradation list of the AMIE qualified Junior Engineers as well as the order dt. 30.12.2023 to the extent that they considered and granted promotion under the AMIE Quota to such Junior Engineers who obtained their qualification before entering service, should be quashed. 17. This argument is based on Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is the contention of the petitioner that the clauses enabling this grant of promotion to Junior Engineers who secured AMIE Quota even before entering service have no nexus with the object of enacting the AMIE Quota classification. 18. She contends that this quota should be confined only to people the AMIE qualification after they entered service like her, because, they have been incentivised to pursue and secure the said qualification while in service. 19. According to the petitioner, provisions in the said resolutions are repugnant to and defeat the purpose of the classification and they are prejudicial to administrative efficiency, because, by including pre-qualified W.P. (S) No.2866 of 2024 Junior Engineers in the AMIE Quota, leads to stagnancy and there would be no incentive on the part of pre-qualified incumbents to pursue higher education, because they are assured of accelerated career progression by virtue of the pre-existing qualification. 20. According to her, by extending the scope of AMIE Quota to pre- qualified Junior Engineers, the respondents have left no difference between regular promotion through the 28% Diploma Holder Quota and 10% AMIE Quota. 21. The Respondents 3, 4 and 5 have filed a counter affidavit reiterating what the impugned resolutions state and contend that they have enforced the said resolutions. However during oral submissions, Counsel for respondents refuted the contentions of petitioner. 22. We have noted the contentions of both sides. 23. It is not in dispute that in the erstwhile State of Bihar, there was a resolution dt. 17.01.1979 by which in the cadre of Assistant Engineers under the Bihar Engineering Services Grade-II, 3% quota was fixed for Junior Engineers who passed Graduation in Engineering and who had completed minimum 5 of service in the post of Junior Engineer. 24. It appears that the issue had previously arisen before the Patna High Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Sinha, C.W.J.C. No. 8744 of 1992 and analogous cases. Petitioners in the said cases had contended that there is no rationale behind giving preference to only such Junior Engineer who acquired degree in Engineering or its equivalent degree after entering the service as Junior Engineer; and leaving those who, at the time of entry in service as Junior Engineers, possessed the said degree. They also pointed out that the State Government had considered cases of promotion of certain Junior Engineers also who possessed the Engineering degree at the time of entering in service as Junior Engineers, that the petitioners in the said writ W.P. (S) No.2866 of 2024 petitions are similarly placed, and that it would be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India to discriminate against them. Though the Department strenuously opposed the said plea, the Patna High Court had held against the Department. It held that there was no valid reason to deprive the petitioners who already possessed the requisite qualification at the time of their recruitment as Junior Engineers from being considered for appointment in the Bihar Engineering Services Class II posts and they cannot be discriminated as against person who acquired the qualification later while in service. The Court held that if a person is denied the benefit of promotion only on account of the fact that he acquired the degree in Engineering or equivalent qualification before entering in service, he would lose interest in service as for no fault of his, he would be deprived of the same benefit, although he is also working as Junior Engineer with the same qualification at the time when cases of Junior Engineers for promotion against the said quota are taken up for consideration, irrespective of their seniority and the other experience. 25. Thus, the Patna High Court had decided that Junior Engineers who acquired the Engineering qualification before they joined the service cannot be discriminated against those who secured such qualification while in service and there was no valid reason to do so. 26. The rationale given by the Patna High Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Sinha (supra), though it dealt with the case of persons seeking promotion as Junior Engineer who possessed qualification before joining service, would equally apply to the instant case where the State Government had granted the benefit to Junior Engineers for seeking promotion to the post of Assistant Engineers whether or not they acquired the qualifications of AMIE before or after joining service. Page 7 of 7 W.P. (S) No.2866 of 2024 27. The contention advanced by the petitioner alleging discrimination cannot be accepted, because, it is obvious that the State wanted the persons who possessed AMIE Qualification or its equivalent, irrespective of when they acquired the qualification, i.e., before joining service or after joining service, to be promoted to ensure that the efficiency for administration is maintained. 28. Denial of benefit of promotion as Assistant Engineer merely because a Junior Engineer had acquired the AMIE qualification or its equivalent before entering in service would be counter-productive as the candidate would lose interest in service because for no fault of his, he would be deprived of the same benefit which is being given to other Junior Engineers with the same qualification, merely because the latter acquired the qualification after he joined service. 29. We do not agree to the contentions of the petitioner that permitting Junior Engineers who already had an AMIE qualification before they joined service would deprive persons who acquired such qualification after they joined the service from the promotion. We also do not agree that such a provision would not incentivise those who pursue higher qualification while in service or that such provision has no nexus with the object of enacting AMIE quota classification. 30. Moreover, since the petitioner had not even objected to the provisional seniority-list issued prior to the final gradation list dt. 28.03.2023/30.12.2023, petitioner cannot be granted any relief as regards a promotion already effected. 31. Therefore, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. No costs. (M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.) N.F.R. Manoj/-