VASANT KUMAR JAISWAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, an Executive Engineer (Designs) M. G. Basin at Raipur, feels aggrieved by the gradation list of Executive Engineers published on 22-8-1979 and challenges its legality in this petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE petitioner is a direct recruit as an Assistant Engineer having joined the said assignment on 27 11-1961. He was confirmed as an Assistant Engineer with effect from 6-10-1968. The petitioner, unfortunately, could not be promoted as an Executive Engineer in his turn and was superseded by several persons who were junior to him in the cadre of Assistant engineer. However, all these persons, including the petitioner, are still officiating in the cadre of Executive Engineer. They have, however, been shown senior to the petitioner in the said gradation list. The submission of the petitioner is that the seniority in the cadre of Executive Engineer should count not from the date of their officiating promotion in the said cadre, but be the same as in their substantive cadre of Assistant Engineer. In other words, the claim of the petitioner is that even though he has been promoted as an Executive Engineer after those Assistant Engineers who were junior to him in the cadre of Assistant Engineer, yet his seniority in the Executive Engineer's cadre should remain the same as in the substantive cadre. Reliance is placed on Rule 12 (c) of M. P. Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ). Reliance is also placed on a decision of this Court in Umesh Narayan Mishra v. State of M. P. , M. P No. 181 of 1982 decided on 15-3-1984.

(3.) RULE 12 (c) of the Rules, which is relevant for our purposes, reads as follows:-