SHAM LAL AGGARWAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue under consideration is whether the condition imposed while granting promotion could be said to be legally valid or could be so imposed only on the basis of provisions made in the draft rules. Though no substantial question of law was formulated earlier but the counsel representing the appellant has placed before me the questions of law that would arise in this case. As per the counsel, the following substantial questions of law are involved in this case:

(2.) ON 22.9.1980, the Government enquired from the appellant if he had made any effort to pass AMIE Examination. In response, the appellant filed a representation, praying that this condition be waived. The Government, in turn, wrote another letter dated 5.11.1980, repeating earlier query. The appellant responded by way of another representation dated 28.11.1980. Fearing his reversion, the appellant had filed a suit, seeking declaration that though he was temporarily promoted but had right to be regularised after three years satisfactory service and also would have a right to be confirmed against the said post. The appellant had also pleaded that his reversion, as a sequel to the query, would be arbitrary, malafide, prejudicial, illegal and unconstitutional. The appellant would plead that there are no statutory rules governing the promotion to Class I Service of the Panchayati Raj Department and in the absence of the provisions, the Rules applicable to the Department of Public Health, PWD (B&R) were being applied to consider the cases of promotion in the Department of Panchayati Raj. The appellant would also point out that the condition, requiring diploma holder to pass the AMIE Examination, had been waived off by the Government in regard to PWD (B&R) Public Health Department and accordingly case was made out for waiving this condition for promotion imposed in the case of the appellant who was so promoted as Executive Engineer in the Panchayati Raj Department.

(3.) THE respondent had contested the suit by controverting the pleas raised in the plaint. It was emphasized that promotion of the appellant was conditional and he was required to pass AMIE Examination within two years. Failure on his part was to lead to his reversion and this was also so stated in the conditional order of promotion. THE respondent would urge that the condition as imposed is not discriminatory and the reliance on the Rules of PWD (B&R) would not be appropriate, these rules being inapplicable to the Panchayati Raj Department. It is then pointed out that the draft rules were framed in the year 1974 and these have since been followed as these would atleast be taken as executive instructions. It is, thus, asserted that all promotions from Sub Divisional Officer to the post of Executive Engineer were made on the condition of requiring the employees to pass AMIE Examination and this condition was imposed in almost all the cases of those employees who were diploma holders. It is disclosed that this condition could not be imposed in the case of one Ved Parkash Takyar due to some mistake and but the said employee was reverted when this fact came to the notice of the respondent.