SAMAR PAL SINGH Vs. STATE PUBLIC SERVICES TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed challenging the judgment and order passed by the U. P. State Public Services Tribunal (hereinafter called the Tribunal') dated 5. 11. 2007, by which the claim of the petitioner seeking pro motion giving the benefit of the past services at the earlier place of posting has been rejected.

(2.) FACTS and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner was appointed as 'seenchpal' in the Irrigation Department of the State of U. P. on 21. 9. 1978. On his own request with a clear understanding that he would loose seniority, he was transferred from Irrigation Division, Kashipur, Nainital to Irriga tion Division, Bijnore on 1. 11. 1994. When the process for filling up the higher post by promotion on the basis of seniority subject to being unfit was initiated, peti tioner who joined at Bijnor on bottom seniority in 1994, also claimed promotion that he was entitled for getting the benefit of his services prior to his transfer at Bijnor. His claim was not considered, hence he preferred the Claim Petition be fore the learned Tribunal which has been rejected vide impugned judgment and order. Hence this petition.

(3.) 1 n Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri and Anr. v. V. M. Joseph, AIR 1998 SC 2318, the eligibility condition for promotion was similar as in earlier case i. e. . The length of service and it was held that the issue of promotion should not be con fused with seniority and in case the eligibility for promotion had been the length of service, the employee was entitled to take the benefit of the past services. The Court held as under: "even if a place employee is transferred on his own request, from one to another on the same post, the period of service rendered by him at the earlier place where he held a permanent post and had acquired permanent status, " cannot be excluded from consideration for determining his eligibility for pro motion, though he may have been placed at the bottom of the seniority list at the transferred place. Eligibility for promotion cannot be confused with se niority as these are two different and distinct factors. "