SUDESH KUMAR GILL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The essential reliefs in the writ petitions 1. The twin writ petitions arise out of the same cause of action. The writ petition filed in CWP 17062/2009 by Sh.Gill contains a prayer for reviewing/recalling the orders passed by this Division Bench on 16.12.2008 in C.W.P. No.17621 of 2007 on the ground that the said order had been obtained by the writ petitioner, in that case Sohan Singh, without disclosing the relevant facts and the order passed by the Bench in restoring the date of promotion of Sohan Singh from 17.3.1996 to 03.11.1995 has caused immense prejudice to the petitioners. The other petition in CWP 19155 of 2009 has been filed by Arshad Ali and 5 others containing the similar prayer that the order passed in CWP 17621 of 2007 to be recalled and recast the seniority list issued on 27.10.2009 purportedly in compliance with the order in the above writ petition. Both the writ petitions are being disposed of in the light of the facts and the reference to the parties as enumerated in C.W.P. No.17062 of 2009.

(2.) The contention was that the writ petition in CWP 17621 of 2007 had been filed without impleading him and others, such as Karan Singh, Dharamvir as parties to secure the relief that had immediate relevance for upsetting the seniority position in the department of Development and Panchayat, Government of Haryana. Originally, an application for review had been filed in the said writ petition itself in C.W.P .No.17621 of 2007 but it was disposed of on an order by this Court that the applicant would be at liberty to challenge the decision as aggrieved party by an independent proceeding. II. The case decided in CWP 17621 of 2007

(3.) Since the writ petitions contain a prayer that the order passed by us in C.W.P. No.17621 of 2007 was required to be recalled, it becomes essential to examine on what basis the order was passed and whether it contain any error, even apart from manifest error or patent mistake that would require to be corrected at the instance of the writ petitioners. The petitioner Sohan Singh in Civil Writ Petition No.17621 of 2007 had contended that he had joined as a Junior Engineer with the respondent on 27.11.1981 and regularized on that post w.e.f. 01.11.1986 and shown in the serial No.89 in the seniority list finalized and released on 26.11.95. Three other persons namely Karan Singh, Dharambir Yadav and S.K. Gill, who are parties in these proceedings subsequently joined and they had also been shown as juniors to him in Sr. Nos.119, 157 and 180 respectively. New posts as SDOs had been created in the cadre on 3.11.95. The channel of promotion to the posts of SDOs was Junior Engineers. The rules provided for quota for the posts among direct recruits, persons who were diploma holders and BE/AMIEs holding the posts as JEs. Directs recruits had 50% quota, while promotees and others persons regularized in the feeder posts who were degree holders in Engineering, such as the petitioner had a 4% quota. Although he was eligible against 4% quota, he had not been promoted on 3.11.95 and the promotion was given to him on ad hoc basis on 31.3.96. A spate of writ petitions seem to have been filed by persons who had a grievance about the irregularities in the appointments to SDOs "™ posts and by virtue of order passed Masti Ram v State of Haryana (2001) 2 RSJ 244, orders were passed giving a deemed date of promotion from 3.11.95, when there was vacancy position for him as per quota. At the time when the promotion had been offered to him, he had but a provisional degree certificate alone for having passed B.E. in the Engineering College, Kurukshetra and the examination held in June, 1995. The University had issued the certificate subsequently on 31.11.1995 that recorded the fact that he had been declared passed in the exam held in June, 1995 in 1st Division with Honours.