HIMANSHU S MEHTA Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this Special Civil Application, the petitioner has sought for necessary writs/orders and directions against the respondents to permit him to go back to his original post i.e., to the post of Work Charged Stores Clerk.

(2.) The facts leading to the present petition are as under : The petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Stores Clerk with effect from 10.1.1979 or from the date when he resumes duties. An order to that effect was issued on 20th January, 1979, which is at Annexure-A, at page 17. Thereafter, by an another order dated 16.10.1981, the petitioner along with other 18 employees was transferred on the post of Junior Clerk in the Circle Office in view of the fact that in the newly established Circle Office, Junior Clerks were not available. The said temporary transfer order was passed transferring certain employees on the said post of Junior clerk and accordingly, the petitioner and such other Work Charged Stores Clerk were transferred from the said post of work Charged Stores Clerk to the post of Junior Clerk in the Circle Office. The aforesaid order is produced at Annexure-B, page 19, and as per the contents of the said order, it is purely of temporary nature. It seems that even though the said order is of temporary tenure, the petitioner and some other employees were continued as Junior Clerks in the Circle Office or other Divisional Offices and they were not repatriated back to the parent post, i.e. Work Charged Stores Clerks/Stores Clerks. It is the say of the petitioner that since he was asked to go only for a temporary period as a Junior Clerk, he has shown his willingness to go and he had never given up his right to be reabsorbed back on the original post of Work Charged Stores Clerk. Even the order at Annexure-B, clearly shows that it was merely a stop gap arrangement. It is the say of the petitioner that as per the Government Resolution dated 4.8.1990, a Works Charged Stores Clerk, who has completed 10 years of service, is given training of Works Assistant and thereafter, immediately on completion of 10 years, normally, he is promoted to the post of Works Assistant in Stores Department in the higher pay scale. The petitioner has also annexed some representations as Annexure-C requesting the Department to repatriated him on his original post. The petitioner has also given example of certain Juniors who were given promotional benefit in the parent cadre. The said example is given at page 8 of the petition. By a letter dated 29th May, 1990, the Superintending Engineer, Ahmedabad City, informed the Executive Engineer (Road and Building) that those Junior Clerks, who were transferred from the post of Work Charged Stores Clerk on temporary basis and who were willing to go back, may send their applications to the Department within 3 days so that necessary procedure can be followed. It seems that the petitioner has made such representations from time to time to the Department requesting the Department to repatriate him on his original post. One of such request letters has been produced at page-24, which was addressed to the concerned Minister of the Department, wherein he has given reference of his earlier application, and copy of the said letter was sent to the Secretary of the Department, Deputy Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer. Ultimately, since the petitioner was not repatriated back on his original post of Work Charged Stores Clerk, he challenged the said action by way of filing the present Special Civil Application.

(3.) The petition was admitted by this Court on 4th December, 1990. By an interim order, the petitioner was permitted to go for training on giving an undertaking to this Court to the effect that, ultimately, if the petition is dismissed, he will not ask for any equity or right in his favour on the basis of completing such training. The interim order passed by this Court dated 20th December, 1990 is placed on record. Similar type of interim orders were also passed in two other petitions. The aforesaid training was regarding the post of Works Assistant, as, on completion of such training, an employee can be considered for the post of Works Assistant in the Department. The said post is in the parent cadre of the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, has challenged the said action of the respondents for not repatriating him to his original post of Work Charged Stores Clerk and to protect his seniority accordingly.