KALAVATI P Vs. DIRECTOR NIMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed for a direction to call for the records relating to Circular Rc.No.4/197/89-El,dt.7-ll-1991and also for a consequential order to the effect that the promotion of the 2nd respondent as Senior Lab-Investigator issued in proceedings Rc.No.4/260/NIMS/92-E2, dt.11-3-1992, is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of the principles of natural justice.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed pursuant to an advertisement dt.26-2-1988 as junior lab investigator in the Nizams Institute of Medical Sciences. The educational qualifications prescribed for the post of junior lab-investigator are - B.Sc. with Botany, Zoology, Chemistry subjects and a Diploma/Certificate course in Medical Lab-Technology from a Medical College. The petitioner passed M.Sc., with Chemistry and possess Diploma in preventive medicine.In addition to that, she had practical experience in the Laboratory tests for more than a year. She was called for the interview along with the other eligible candidates on 17-9-1988. She was selected and placed as No.1 in the list of candidates selected on that day. Pursuant to the selection, an appointment order was issued on 28-9-88. She joined duty on 15-10-1988. The appointment was made on a consolidated pay of Rs.800/-. With effect from 12-5-89 she was paid the time scale to the said post. The services of the petitioner were regularised with effect from 15-10-88 by order dt.7-9-90. On her appointment, the petitioner was placed on probation for a period of two years within a continuous period of three years from 15-10-1988. She had completed her probation. On 26-9-91, the first respondent issued a seniority list of junior lab-investigators of the Institute. According to the said seniority list, petitioner was shown at SI, No.15. The date of regularisation was shown as 1-4-1989 instead of 15-10-1988. Therefore, she filed objection. The 1st respondent by his order dated 7-11-91 changed the seniority list of junior lab-investigators fixed earlier, by circular dt.26-9-91 and placed the 2nd respondent at SI. No.15 i.e., above the petitioner without any notice to her. The 2nd respondent joined duty on 21-10-1988 as junior lab-investigator, whereas the petitioner joined on 15-10-1988 and her services were regularised with effect from that date. It is her submission that the 2nd respondent should not therefore be given seniority over the petitioner. The 1st respondent also created 15 posts of senior labinvestigators by proceedings dt.20-2-1992. The 1st respondent by his proceedings dt.11-3-92 promoted the 2nd respondent as senior labinvestigator along with 14 other junior lab-investigators. Since the 2nd respondent is junior to the petitioner, the petitioner contends that the 2nd respondent is not entitled to be promoted. Hence the Writ Petition.

(3.) The first and 2nd respondents filed counter-affidavits. In the counter-affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, it is stated that the 2nd respondent applied for the post of Junior lab-investigator in pursuance of the notification issued by the Institute and he was also interviewed on 17-9-1988 by the Selection Committee. On the basis of the recommendation of the selection committee, he was appointed on 28-9-1988. The Selection Committee placed the 2nd respondent as No.1 in the merit list whereas the petitioner was shown as No.2 in the merit list. Though the petitioner and the 2nd respondent were appointed on 28-9-88, relying on the ranking given by the selection committee, the 2nd respondent was treated as senior. In the provisional seniority list dt.25-9-91, the petitioner was shown as No.15 and the 2nd respondent was shown as No.33. However, on objections received by both the 2nd respondent as well as the petitioner, the seniority list was corrected by proceedings dt.7-11-91, in which the petitioner was shown as SI. No.16 and the 2nd respondent was shown as SI. No.15, basing on the ranking given by the Selection Committee. To the same effect is the counter filed by the 2nd respondent.