KEWAL KRISHAN Vs. LALIT KALA AKADAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of the fact that the petitioner has retired, I do not want to go into various issues regarding the applicability of 1983 rules with amendment or otherwise.

(2.) This writ petition can be disposed of on the limited point in view of the ordr dated 3rd July 1997 passed by acting Secretary of the respondent. The said order is as follows :-

(3.) There is no dispute to this proposition of fact accept according to the respondent the appointment of the respondent as Programme Officer as well as Trinnale Officer was ad hoc. The whole case of the respondent is based on the assumption that the petitioner was not entitled to be appointed as a Deputy Secretary on the regular basis in the year 1994 when the petitioner was appointed Deputy Secretary (Admn) on 29.6.1994. If that was the case then the order of reversion which reverted the petitioner to the grade of accounts officer i.e. Rs.2000-3200.00 , which the petitioner was getting in the year 1987 till 1990 smacks of vindictiveness. The impugned order dated 23.7.1997 has not taken into consideration that while working as Programme Officer in the grade of Rs.2000-3200.00 and as Trinnale Officer in the grade of Rs.3000-4500.00 no complaint against the petitioner relating to his service was ever brought to the notice of the respondent. No action whatsoever has been taken by the respondent in that period. The work of the petitioner was satisfactory. No material is on record to show that the appointment either as a Programme Officer or Trinnale Officer was bad in law. Making an order -reverting the petitioner two steps down is absolutely without any basis, unreasonable, arbitrary and uncalled for. Even if the petitioner was not appointed in terms of recruitment rules as Deputy Secretary (Admn) as alleged by the respondent, his pay and grade <PG>344</PG> ought to have been protected by the respondent which has not been done in this case.