PURANJIT SINGH Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Engineer in the Irrigation Department of the Punjab Government on 15th July, 1968. He was, thereafter, given an option to join the Public Works Department [Buildings and Roads] [hereinafter referred to as 'PWD (B and R)'] of the said Government. He accepted the offer and resumed his duties in the new Department on l4th January, 1969. In 1972, the PWD [B and R] invited applications for direct recruitment for the post of Assistant Engineer. The petitioner applied for one of them and he was formally appointed as a direct recruit in the said Department on 18th August. 1972. On 30th September/6th October, 1972, the Irrigation Department passed formal order relieving him from the Department which in fact ought to have been done on l4th January, 1969 when the petitioner had opted to join the PWD [B and R]. It appears that on his appointment in the PWD [B and R] as a direct recruit, he was sent on deputation to the Chandigarh Administration [Engineering Department] on 7th October, 1972.

(2.) It appears that notwithstanding this decision, the petitioner continued to press his representation dated 15th January, 1980 made against the notification dated 14th January, 1980 giving him seniority from 7th October, 1972 and requesting for his seniority from 15th July, 1968. It appears that on this representation, the Home Secretary of the Chandigarh Administration on 14th May 1992, put up a note to the Adviser to the Administrater recommending the counting of seniority of the petitioner as Senior Divisional Engineer from 15th July, 1968. On 25th May, 1992, the Adviser to the Adimnistrater, wrote on this note "Please discuss". Thereafter, the Advisor discussed the matter with the Home Secretary and wrote on the said note as follows:

(3.) In the meanwhile, it appears that on his posting on deputation in the Chandigarh Administration on 7th October, 1972, the petitioner was sent on deputation by the Administration to the Housing Board. In the Housing Board, he held current duty-charge as Executive Engineer from the 4th October, 1977. Subsequently on 23rd December, 1980 he was appointed there as ad hoc Executive Engineer and became regular Executive Engineer there on 26th September, 1981. When he was holding the posts as current duty-charge as Executive Engineer and as ad hoc Executive Engineer in the Housing Board, his substantive post was that of Assistant Engineer. On 11th May, 1984, he was transferred back to the Engineering Department of the Chandigarh Administration as Executive Engineer. In this conneetion, it may be noted here that he became eligible to the post of Executive Engineer in his parent Department (Engineering Department of the Chandigarh Administration) on 7th October, 1980, i.e., after service as Assistant Engineer for eight years counted from 7th October, 1972. He was appointed to the said post on 23rd December, 1980 on ad hoc basis for six months. On 15th October, 1981, the promotion was regularised. Again, he became eligible to hold the post of Superintending Engineer there after seven years of service as Executive Engineer under Rule 9, on 15th October, 1988. However, in the said Department the first vacancy in the post of Superintending Engineer, after he became eligible to the said post occurred only on 1st December, 1988. He was appointed to the said post initially on ad hoc basis with effect from that date. The said appointment was regularised with effect from that date later on. It is not disputed that thereafter, the petitioner has been promoted in the Housing Board as Chief Engineer in due course as per the Rules.