The only plea raised is that the petitioner did not make any representation when his juniors were promoted in the year 1972, 1973, 1979 and 1987. It is established on record that petitioner was not considered for promotion even when his juniors were promoted from time to time. Petitioner is matriculate. One Fateh Singh, who is matriculate and junior from the petitioner was promoted on 09.01.1985. Some of the juniors who are matriculates were promoted w.e.f. 1979. All other promotees were graduates. Therefore, there is no valid reasons to deny promotion to the petitioner when his juniors were promoted.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No.421 of 1993
Decided on: 30.09.2008
Vidya Prakash Vs The State of Punjab
CORAM: MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI
Petitioner was appointed as Copyist in the Court of Sub Judge III Class, Fatehgarh Sahib, District Patiala on 02.05.1949. He joined service on 05.05.1949 and later on confirmed on 03.10.1955. It is alleged that the respondents were making promotions from time to time without considering the case of the petitioner. Petitioner has named as many as 19 persons who were promoted to the next post of Assistant between the year 1970 to 1985. It is alleged that seniority position was never circulated and when the petitioner came to know of promotions of his juniors, he made a representation with District & Sessions Judge, Patiala on
20.12.1985 (Annexure P-1). The District and Sessions Judge, Patiala issued a circular dated 06.01.1986 stating therein that the seniority list dated 07.12.1985 is not complete in all respects and complete seniority list is being circulated shortly. Even the representations were returned to the petitioners with the direction that they should make their representation after the circulation of the fresh seniority list. Petitioner made another representation (Annexure P-3) claiming his promotion with effect from the date his juniors were promoted. In the meantime, one Parmod Singh Patyal filed service appeal which came to be
C.W.P. No.421 of 1993 -2- decided vide judgement dated 26.05.1988 by learned Single Judge of this Court wherein it was recorded that in view of the issuance of joint seniority list all officials concerned would be entitled to their seniority and promotion in accordance therewith. Thereafter, petitioner was also promoted as Assistant w.e.f. 05.08.1988. In the reply filed the seniority position of the petitioner over and above earlier promotees is not disputed. The only plea raised is that the petitioner did not make any representation when his juniors were promoted in the year 1972, 1973, 1979 and 1987. It is established on record that petitioner was not considered for promotion even when his juniors were promoted from time to time. Petitioner is matriculate. One Fateh Singh, who is matriculate and junior from the petitioner was promoted on 09.01.1985. Some of the juniors who are matriculates were promoted w.e.f. 1979. All other promotees were graduates. Therefore, there is no valid reasons to deny promotion to the petitioner when his juniors were promoted. In the given circumstances, this petition is allowed and respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion w.e.f. 09.05.1979 when Jagir Singh and Joginder Singh, matriculates were promoted as Assistants. I am informed that petitioner has already retired from service, therefore, he will be entitled to notional promotion w.e.f. 09.05.1979 to 05.08.1988 without any monetary benefits, however, his emoluments will be fixed by giving him notional benefits of increments etc and consequently his retiral benefits will be redetermined on that basis. September 30, 2008 (PERMOD KOHLI) Pankaj* JUDGE
No comments:
Post a Comment