SATPAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of three Civil Writ Petition Nos.8072 of 1991 (Dr.Satpal and another Vs. State of Haryana and others), 8266 of 1991 (Dr.Balbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others), and 8664 of 1991 (Dr.Bal Kishan Sangwan Vs. State of Haryana and others). The facts are being taken from Civil Writ Petition No.8072 of 1991.

(2.) THE petitioners in these petitions were working as Ayurvedic Officer. Some post of District Ayurvedic Officers were created by the Department through an executive instructions. THE following qualifications were provided for the post of District Ayurvedic Officers: i. Matric; ii. A degree (with atleast five years regular course) in Ayurvedic system and medicine from any University/Medical Board or faculty of Indian Medicine established by law or recognised by the Government. THE petitioners, though were not falling in the seniority but were qualified as per the qualifications mentioned above. Accordingly, the petitioners were promoted as District Ayurvedic Officer on 3.8.1987. THEy continued to work as such. However, in the year 1989, new Rules were framed known as Haryana Ayurvedic Department (Group B) Service Rules, 1989. As per the amended Rules also and especially in view of Rule 7, no person could be appointed in the service unless he was possessing the qualification and experience specified in Column 3 of Appendix B, which reads as under: Appendix `B' (See Rule 7) xx xx xx xx xx 2. Ayurvedic officer/ Essential Distt. Ayurvedic Officer. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8072 OF 1991 :{ 3 }: i. Knowledge of Hindi upto matric standard. ii. A degree (with five years regular course) in Ayurvedic/Unani System of Medicines from any University or institution recognised by the Government. Iii. Six years experience as Chikitsak (Physician)/Resident Physician (Ayurvedic/Unani) or eight years experience as Ayurvedic Medical Medical Officer Officer/Unani in the dispensary/Hospital Government. run by the While promoting the petitioners, the Ayurvedic Officer, who were ranking senior to the petitioners were ignored because they were not having the requisite qualifications for promotion to the post of District Ayurvedic Officer. Aggrieved against this action of the Government, some of the senior officials approached this Court through Civil Writ Petition No.5134 of 1987.

(3.) THE said writ petition was admitted and was statedly pending when the present writ petitions were filed. Need to file these writ petitions arose as order reverting the petitioners was passed and private respondent Nos.2 to 5 were sought to be promoted. Accordingly, the petitioners filed the present writ petitions to challenge their reversion order and so also the promotion of respondent Nos.2 to 5.