CHANDER SHEKHAR Vs. DELHI JAL BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other writ/direction thereby directing the Delhi Jal Board, respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as "the respondent DJB") to promote the petitioner with effect from 21st March, 2003 and also to declare him senior to respondents No.2 and 3.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was working with the respondent DJB as Assistant Security Officer, with effect from 11th October, 1996. According to the seniority list circulated by the respondent DJB in September 2001, the petitioner was shown at Sr. No. 9 on the basis of seniority list and reservation roster. In February 2003, three posts of Security Officer fell vacant and a Departmental Promotion Committee (hereinafter referred to as "DPC") was held in the same month to select three Assistant Security Officers for promotion to the post of Security Officer. On 21st March, 2003, the DPC promoted only two persons excluding the petitioner for the post of Security Officer. In the year 2004, a decision was taken by the DPC not to fill up the third vacancy on the ground that there were inadequate number of posts available in the feeder cadre. Another DPC was held in January, 2005 for filling up three posts of Security Officers as till that time, two more vacancies had arisen at the said post against point 8 and 9 of the reservation roster. This time, on the recommendation of the DPC, vide Office Order dated 27th January, 2005, three persons were promoted to the post of Security Officers including the petitioner. However, the name of the petitioner was shown at Sr. No. 3 after that of Mr. Jaipal Singh, respondent No.2 and Mr. S.P. Dalal, respondent No.3.

(3.) Aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondent DJB in showing his name at Sr. No. 3 in the seniority list, i.e. after respondents No.2 and 3 and in not granting him the consequential benefits of promotion with effect from 21st March, 2003, the petitioner approached this Court and filed the present petition. However, during the pendency of this petition, vide Office Order dated 1st February, 2007, the respondent DJB granted the petitioner notional promotion to the post of Security Officer with effect from 21st March, 2003 and it was further stated therein that the issue of his seniority would be dealt with separately. In the Seniority List dated 22nd June, 2007 circulated subsequently, the petitioner was shown to be senior to respondents No. 2 and 3, i.e., while the petitioner is shown at Sr. No. 6, the respondent No.2 is shown at Sr. No. 8 and the respondent no.3 is shown therein at Sr. No.9. Thus, the said grievance of the petitioner was also redressed by the respondent DJB. In this view of the matter, the petitioner sought to limit the relief sought in the present petition only to the grant of consequential benefits of promotion to him w.e.f. 21st March, 2003, i.e., from the date he was granted notional promotion by the respondent DJB.