Pre-existing municipal service rules continue under savings provisions until superseded by new rules.

The petitioner, an Assistant/Clerk employed under Nagar Parishad, Dehri-Dalmianagar, claimed promotion to the post of Head Clerk on the grounds that he was eligible, senior-most, and that the post was vacant.

He also sought consequential benefits under the applicable pay-scale rules and ACP/MACP benefits.

The petitioner challenged the Nagar Parishad’s decision contained in Letter No. 27 dated 9 January 2024, Agenda No. 5, whereby respondent no. 6, a contractual and allegedly junior employee, was given charge of Head Clerk.

The petitioner stated that he had already submitted a representation before the Executive Officer, but no decision had been taken on it.

The Nagar Parishad contended that the petitioner’s grievances were required to be considered by the Empowered Standing Committee under the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007.

Whether the petitioner’s claims relating to promotion to Head Clerk, consequential pay benefits, and ACP/MACP benefits were required to be considered by the competent municipal authority under the applicable service rules

Whether the pre-existing rules governing appointment and promotion of municipal officers and employees continued to operate in the absence of service rules framed under Section 40A of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007

Whether the petitioner was entitled to immediate judicial direction for his promotion and to the setting aside of the order assigning charge of Head Clerk to respondent no. 6

The Court applied Section 40A of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007, which authorises the State Government to frame service rules governing recruitment, service conditions, posting, transfer, promotion, disciplinary action, and related matters concerning municipal officers and employees.

It further applied Section 488(1), read with Section 488(4)(b), under which earlier enactments, rules, bye-laws, and regulations continued to remain operative after repeal unless superseded, modified, or altered under the 2007 Act.

Since no service rules had been framed under Section 40A, the Court held that the Rules for regulating appointment and qualification of officers and servants of Municipalities and Notified Area Committees, issued vide S.O. No. 956 dated 25 June 1977, continued to apply.

Under Clause 2 of those Rules, the committee presently known as the Empowered Standing Committee was competent to deal with appointments and promotions.

The Court noted that the parties jointly accepted that service rules had not yet been framed under Section 40A of the 2007 Act.

It therefore examined the savings provision in Section 488 and concluded that the earlier municipal service rules continued by virtue of Section 488(4)(b), unless replaced or modified by a subsequent rule.

Applying Clause 2 of the 1977 Rules, the Court held that the Empowered Standing Committee, rather than the Court in the first instance, was the appropriate authority to consider the petitioner’s claims concerning promotion and related service benefits.

The Court did not determine the petitioner’s seniority, eligibility, entitlement to promotion, validity of respondent no. 6’s charge arrangement, or claim for ACP/MACP benefits on merits.

Instead, it directed the petitioner to pursue the statutory and administrative remedy through a fresh representation.

The petitioner was directed to submit a fresh representation, along with a copy of the judgment, to the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Dehri-Dalmianagar, within 30 days.

Upon receipt, the Executive Officer was directed to place the matter before the Empowered Standing Committee and, after its decision, pass an appropriate order within 90 days thereafter.