SAROJ RANI DHANNA SINGH RAVI LAMBA PUNJAB MINISTERIAL QUALIFIED ASSISTANT ASSN TARLOK SINGH SUKHDEV SINGH SARPAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted in the Special Leave Petitions Nos. 376-379 of 1999.

(2.) It is very common scenario in a service to see litigation spurting whenever more than one avenue is opened in any recruitment or promotion. It may be between direct recruits or promotees or inter se within a class creating two or more groups for promotion to a next higher grade. Sometime it is more out of exuberance of one or the other group to have greater lion share in a higher grade or may be on account of some ambiguous instruction or an order without proper application of mind or any rule shrinking, extinguishing or effecting ones right, inevitably the litigation opens up. It further multiplies on account of amendments, orders etc. during pendency of litigations may be on account of interim orders passed by Courts, bringing in new persons, class or groups into this fray. It is this which destandarises the efficiency of service class as not only lot of energy adrift in pursuing this but it fans poison within the two contesting such classes. The present group of cases is also one of such case, details of which we are referring hereunder.

(3.) The aforesaid appeals arise after the conclusion of spate of litigations in its first leg, when their grouse not being satisfied they rolled into second round. The present second leg of dispute is raised by group of clerks working in the various departments of the Government of Punjab. There are two sets of contest, the one is inter se between the group which had passed the examination under the Punjab State Assistant Grade Examination Rules, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the '1984 Rules'), viz., the one who has passed within five chances and the others who passed in more than five chances. The other set is between the group who passed the examination irrespective of number of chances and the group who were granted exemption from appearing in the examination under Rule 12. The exemptees under it are those who completed 18 years of their regular service. The claim for promotion of all these groups are for the posts of Assistant (redesignated as Senior Assistant). Before reverting to the facts of each of the aforesaid appeals, it is necessary to give short summary of the aforesaid rules and conditions of service preceding these rules. Prior to the aforesaid Rule of 1984 promotion from the post of clerk to the post of Assistant were made purely on the basis of seniority-cum-merit having requisite period of experience and qualification. Thus came change in policy of the Government. In order to bring up meritorious and efficient employees, promotion were decided to be only to those who pass an examination under Rule 4 of the aforesaid 1984 Rules. Rule 4 made it obligatory for the first time on all the holders of substantive post of clerks to be considered for next higher post of Assistant if they qualify the Assistant Grade Examination to be conducted in accordance with Rules 5, 6 and 7. Rule 4 is quoted hereunder:-