S C SHARMA Vs. B D WARIAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of all the three petitions are substantially the same. They involve common question of law. They were heard together and it is proposed to dispose of these petitions by this common judgment. CWP No.6789/2000 was treated as the leading, case and the counsel for the parties made their submissions with reference to the record of this case. It would be therefore appropriate to narrate the facts of this petition for understanding the controversy and appreciate the respective points of view of the parties.

(2.) The petitioners in this petition feel aggrieved by judgment dated 9th November, 2000 passed by the learned Tribunal in OA No.1407/2000. These petitioners and private respondent, namely, respondent No.3 are all working as Stenographer Gr.C on long term basis. The respondent No.3 is senior to the petitioners. Next promotion is to the post of Stenographer Gr.'B'&'A'. It may be mentioned that;the service of the petitioners and the respondent No.3 comprises of Grades 'D', 'C', 'B' and 'A' in ascending order of hierarchy. Later 'B'&'A' were merged, and termed 'merged A&B' Grades. Next promotion is to the merged 'A&B'. It is governed by Central Secretariat Stenographers Service (CSSS) Rules, 1969. As per these Rules promotion to the grade of merged Gr. A&B in CSSS is made after 8 years of completed service. Rule 2(C) of CSSS Rules defines approved Service in the following manner :

(3.) While it is not in dispute that the petitioners were junior to the respondent No.3, it is also not in dispute that in cadre of Grade C, the petitioners completed 8 years of approved service in the year 1995 as they were promoted as Gr.C on 30th January, 1987 whereas the respondent No.3 was promoted on 30th June, 2000. Between the years 1995 and 2000 the petitioners were promoted to merged A&B Grade on adhoc basis from time to time. The respondent No.3 though senior, was hot given promotion even on adhoc basis as he had not completed 8 years of approved service at that time. Since the appointment was only on adhoc basis and in the year 2000 the respondent No.3 completed 8 years of approved service, while passing orders of adhoc promotion, keeping in view the seniority of the respondent No.3 and the fact that he had become eligible for promotion to merged A & B grade on completion of 8 years of approved service, the respondent No.3 was given promotion on adhoc basis to replace the petitioners. At this juncture, the petitioners filed OA No.1407/2000 with the following prayers :