SUDHIR KUMAR BHATNAGAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought quashing of the Seniority list (Annexure -17) to the writ petition. Also, mandamus has been sought for correction in the Seniority list giving the petitioner his due place and directing the promotion to the petitioner due to him.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that Indian Counsel of Forestry Research and Education (respondent no. 2) is a Central Government department and Forest Research Institute (for brevity FRI) is one of the institutes of the said department. The F.R.I. is an autonomous organization created vide Central Govt. Order 1/8/89 -RT dated 30 -5 -1991 of the Ministry of Environment and Forest. The petitioner was initially appointed as Technical Assistant, Grade -I vide order -dated 30 -8 -1977 passed by respondent no. 4 and in pursuance thereof the petitioner joined his duties on 31 -8 -1977 in F.R.I., Dehradun. It is further alleged that the petitioner's appointment was against substantive vacancy of Technical Assistant, Grade -I. The petitioner, on completion of probation was allowed quasi permanent appointment status vide order dated 7/8 -4 -1982 passed by the respondent no. 4 w.e.f. 31 -8 -1980. The Registrar of the F.R.I. (respondent no.4) vide an order dated 20 -3 -1992 communicated that the petitioner is readjusted against the post of Assistant Machine Operator in the revised pay scale of Rs. 950 -1500/ -. There was no question of readjustment as the petitioner was already working as Technical Assistant, Grade -I. The petitioner's services - were confirmed after the recommendation of the D.P.C. w.e.f. 2 -4 -1992. Further the formal confirmation order was issued on 7 -1 -1996 (Annexure -6) by the respondent no. 4. A department known as Logging Development Institute (for brevity L.D.I.) was merged in the F.R.I. vide Central Govt. orders dated 4 -5 -1987 and 1 -6 -1987 (Annexure - 7 and 8) and its staff was also absorbed with the F.R.I., Dehradun. In 1989 a seniority list of the employees was prepared (Annexure -9 and 10). Later employees of L.D.I. were given place with the employees of the F.R.I. in the provisional seniority list dated 24 -3 -1994. In which the employees Junior to the petitioner were given place above the petitioner. As such the petitioner has alleged the said list was arbitrary and discriminatory against him. Consequence to said seniority list the persons Junior to the petitioner, namely, Shri H.S. Chauhan, Shri Deepak Kumar, Shri R.P. Singh and Shri C.M. Sharma (respondent no. 5 to 8) were promoted to the post of Logging Inspectors. Aggrieved by which the petitioner made representation on 17 -11 -1997 and. 23 -4 -1998 (Annexure -14 and 15) to the concerned authorities. Thereafter a provisional seniority list (Annexure -16) was prepared on - 3 -9 -1998 wherein the petitioner was shown at serial no.1 but respondent no.1 arbitrarily and illegally again changed the seniority list whereby the petitioner was down listed in seniority list (Annexure -17) from the serial no.1 to serial no.7. Aggrieved by which the petitioner has challenged the seniority list through this writ petition.

(3.) ON behalf of the respondents no.1, 2, 3 and 4 counter affidavit has been filed by one Shri Dhirendra Kumar, Assistant Administrative Officer who has admitted that the petitioner was appointed initially as Technical Assistant Grade -I in the pay scale of Rs. 260 -400/ - but it is alleged .that the said appointment was temporary under the Fifth Five Year Plan Scheme. After the said scheme were over the petitioner was accommodated in Forest Fire Protection Scheme and later adjusted against the vacancy of Assistant Machine Operator in the revised pay scale of Rs. 950 -1500/ - w.e.f. 2 -4 -1992. In the counter affidavit it is stated that in 1989 petitioner's seniority was wrongly mentioned in the seniority list. The anomaly was detected on 21 -4 -1992. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that in his letter dated 5th March, 1985 (Copy Annexure CA -5) petitioner himself has admitted that he was an employee under a scheme. The persons shown senior to the petitioner, absorbed from the earlier L.D.I. were regular employees and there is no illegality or discrimination in the impugned seniority list. The reason given in the counter affidavit for bringing down the name of the petitioner from serial no.1 to serial no.7 in the seniority list is that the petitioner was a temporary employee appointed under a scheme.