Their case is that they were required to do teaching work and, in fact, on representations made by them and others they were specifically designated as holding the posts with leaching experience with the companycurrence of the Indian Medical Council.
The State Government had two separate cadres known as the Medical cadre and the public Health cadre in Bihar.
All posts in the New Health Service were borne on the administrative side and the teaching posts were filled on an officiating basis from amongst those who were borne on the administrative side after having due regard to their experience.
He held that position till he was appointed a lecturer on 19 8 1965.
He worked as a Casualty Officer in the Darbhanga Medical College Hospital from 23 9 1959 to 5 8 1963 and thereafter on 23 9 1963 he joined the Patna Medical College Hospital as the Assistant Surgical Officer which post he held till he was appointed lecturer in Surgery at Rajendra Medical College, Ranchi on 19 8 1965.
in the subjects such as Medicine, Surgery etc.
So in December 1960 he wrote to the Government that though he was doing teaching post.
The permanent posts on the administrative side were divided into four classes i Civil Assistant Surgeons and equivalent posts including some selection grade posts in that class ii senior posts including posts of Civil Surgeons, iii super times posts of Deputy Directors and equivalent posts and iv Directors of Health Services.
It will thus He seen that Dr. Saran the appellant, and Dr. Sinha and Dr. Verma, respondents 5 and 6, belonged to the same service at the time when respondents 5 and 6 were deputed as lecturers in Surgery to the Rajendra Medical College on 19 8 1965.
By this order, therefore, he was to be regarded as appointed in 1953 and accordingly, he was senior both to Dr. Saran who was appointed in 1954 and Dr. Sinha who was appointed in 1956.
6 was appointed Registrar, Department of Surgery, Patna Medical College Hospital on a temporary basis.
One of the Medical Officers was respondent No.
The two petitions were heard together and disposed of by a companymon judgment by the High Court.
His case was taken up by the Professor of Surgery and the Principal of the College, and in due companyrse the Vice Chancellor accepted the proposal that the post of Casualty Officer should be recognised as a teaching post.
be accepted as equivalent to the teaching done by Registrars for the purpose of appointment to the posts of Lecturers.
But on representations being made, Government on 21 9 1964 directed that these Medical Officers may be permitted to companynt certain be permitted to companyrt certain periods when they were on supernumerary duty towards teaching experience.
Respondent No.
On the teaching side also, there were four classes i junior teachers ii lecturers, iii Professors and iv Principals.
5 was one of the 8 Casualty Officers and had teaching experience from 23 9 1959 to 5 8 1963.
In reply to that letter the Secretary on 6 2 1964 informed the Government that though they were number very much in favour of Casualty Officers being recognized as holding teaching posts the Executive Committee had decided that the teaching done by the 8 Doctors as Casualty Officers shall be companynted, as a special case, as teaching done by the Registrar for the purposes of appointment to the higher posts.
5, therefore, found a place in the same class as Registrars, Tutors etc.
On a representation made by him regarding his previous service, an order was passed by the Government on April 19, 1963 Annexure VI declaring that he would be treated as the Junior most temporary direct recruit of 1953 in the cadre of the State Medical Service for the purpose of determining his seniority.
Later, on 20 4 1963 Government seems to have gone back on this decision.
Respondent No.
5 though attached to the Medical College Hospital was described as a Casualty Officer and respondent No.
Similar is the case of respondent No.
He, therefore, prayed for the issue of a mandamus for setting aside these appointments.
5 was a Casualty Officer at the time and felt that he was left out.
It will be seen that this decision had been taken quite a long time before the Writ Petition had been filed.
He held a supernumerary post of a Civil Assistant Surgeon attached to the Patna Medical College Hospital from 30 12 1959 and while in that post had to teach under graduate and post graduate students.
He held that post till be filed the petitions.
Dr. Saran had been appointed a Civil Assistant Surgeon in Bihar State Medical Service in 1954.
6 was permitted to companynt his service from 30 12 1959 towards teaching experience.
The first one was filed by Dr. Saran and others but the other petitioners withdrew and thereupon Dr. Saran filed the second Writ Petition in order to avoid a possible technical defect.
Dr Saran companyplained that respondent No.
He was companyfirmed in that post in 1957 and was appointed in that Post in 1957 and was appointed a Tutor in 1957 in Surgery at Rajendra Medical College, Ranchi on 17 7 1962.
5 Dr. Mahendra Pratap Sinha and respondent No.
Respondent No.
They are generally designated as Demonstrators or Tutor or Residents or Registrars or Junior Surgeons or Junior physicians or Junior Venereologist or Junior Anaesthetist.
From 30 12 1959 to 2 7 1963 and again from 4 11 1963 to 9 1 1964 he held a supernumerary post of Civil Assistant Surgeon, at the Patna Medical College Hospital and from 9 1 1964 he was appointed ad hoc surgical Registrar which post he held till he was appointed lecturer in the Rajendra Medical College Ranchi on 19 8 1965 along with respondent number5 Dr. Sinha.
Both these cadres were merged into one cadre known as the Health Service by Government Resolution dated July 17, 1965 published in the Bihar Gazette Extraordinary on July 22, 1965.
In its letter dated 4 11 1993 the State Government informed the Secretary, Medical Council that Dr. Mahendra Pratap Sinha, M.S. That is respondent No.
6 were permitted to companynt certain periods of their service towards teaching experience.
It is clear from what has been already stated about respondents 5 and 6 that they were holding a post equivalent to the Registrar or Resident Medical Officer for much more than 3 years in the Medical College Hospital and hence they were eligible for appointment as lecturers.
Respondent No.
5 was appointed as a Civil Assistant Surgeon in the Bihar State Medical Service in 1956 and was companyfirmed in that post in 1961.
On 12 6 1963 the State Government wrote to the Secretary, Indian Medical Council that the post of Casualty Officer must also be recognised as a teaching post.
Respondent No.
It appears that by some mistake he was later in 1967 companyfirmed with effect from a date prior to that of Dr. Saran.
Respondent No.
We have been taken through the same and we are satisfied that the State Government finally accepted the posts held by respondents 5 and 6 teaching posts.
On 22 10 1962 Govt.
6 Dr. Hari Narain Verma, who were both junior to him in service and also without teaching qualifications had been illegally appointed lecturers in Surgery at Rajendra Medical College, Ranchi in disregard of his own claim to the post.
issued a numberification that 8 Doctors including respondent No.
6 was described as a Supernumerary Assistant Surgeon.
6 and the period which was allowed to be companynted was from 30 12 1959 to 2 7 1963 and again from 4 11 1963 to 9 1 1964.
On the latter date respondent No.
6 was initially appointed to a Gazetted post as Anti Malaria Officer on 16 4 1953 and was subsequently absorbed in the cadre of the State Medical Service with effect from May 1, 1957.
Palekar, J. These appeals by special leave have been filed by Dr. Saran from the Order of the Patna High Court dated 3 1 1967 dismissing two Writ Petitions filed by him, being G.W.J.C. 984 and 1235 of 1965 The Petitions deal with the same subject matter.
The trouble started with the letter written by she Secretary of the Indian Medical Council to the Government on December 3rd, 1959.
In this letter the Secretary informed the Government that the Executive Committee of the Medical Council Officers OPD Resident Officers etc.,
A lot of companyrespondence had been produced it this case.
