SHAM LAL SHARMA Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present case, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of directions to the respondent to promote him from the date his immediate junior was promoted and to treat him having been promoted from the said date together with allowing him consequential benefits.

(2.) It is not necessary to go into the details of the case as it is not in dispute that the petitioner was the senior-most Labour-cum-Counciliation Officer and one post of Deputy Labour Commissioner, Faridabad, was lying vacant on 16.12.1985. Since the Government had contemplated action against the petitioner, he was not considered for promotion. On my direction, the department had produced annual confidential reports of the petitioner which reveal that at no stage any departmental action was taken against the petitioner or he was penalised. The service record of the petitioner from 1973-74 to 1982-83 shows that the petitioner had earned seven good, one quite satisfactory and two average reports. Since the petitioner was not considered for promotion simply on the ground that some action was contemplated against him which in fact was not taken, this petition has to be allowed.

(3.) In view of the foregoing reason, I am of the view that the Department was not justified in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Labour Commissioner whereas junior to the petitioner ws promoted. As such the respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Labour Commissioner from the date his junior was promoted and the petitioner, if found eligible, be promoted with all consequential benefits. This judgment should be implemented within 4 months.