BHOJ RAJ SHARMA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has been in the service of Municipal Committee, Charkhi Dadri-in the State of Haryana. since 15th October, 1967. To start with he was appointed as Octroi Moharrir and after about fifteen years' service, he was promoted as Inspector Octroi on 19th February, 1982.

(2.) AT the time of his promotion as Inspector Octroi, his academic qualifications, experience and work and conduct were duly considered by the Administrator of the Municipal Committee and it was after thorough consideration of the necessary requirements, that the order of promotion was passed on 19th February, 1982. A copy of the order was also communicated to the Secretary to Government Haryana, Local Government Department, on 25th February, 1982, as also to the Director, Local Bodies Haryana. No objection whatsoever was received from any quarter to the promotion of the petitioner, excepting by Sh. Sadhu Ram, Clerk of the Municipal Committee, respondent No. 6 who had been reverted from the post of Inspector Octroi. According to him, as new service rules known as Haryana Municipal Services (Integation, Recruitment and Conditons of Service) Rules, 1982, had come into force before 19th February, 1982 the date on which the petitioner was promoted, the Administrator of the Municipal Committee was no longer the promoting authority and for that reason the order of promotion to the petitioner dated 19th February, 1982, was invalid, even though the Gazette copy of the new Rules was received by the Municipal Committee on 23rd February, 1982. In pursuance thereof, instructions were issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Bhiwani, to the Administrator, Municipal Committee. Charkhi Dadri, that with the enforcement of the Haryana Municipal Services Rules of 1982, the powers of appointment, promotion and transfer at the district level came to be vested with the Deputy Commissioner and that proposals regarding filling of the vacancies should be forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner for his consideration. On the representation made by Shri Sadhu Ram against the promotion of the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner, Bhiwani, served a show cause notice on the petitioner on the June, 1988. In reply thereto, the petitioner brought it to the notice of the respondents that Shri Sadhu Ram, who was promoted as Inspector Octroi earlier, was reverted in pursuance of the decision of the Industrial Tribunal,' Faridabad Against that reversion, Sadhu Ram filed a writ petition in the High Court which was dismissed on 10th December, 1981. It was against that post that the petitioner applied for promotion on 23rd December, 1981. Hence promotion of the petitioner was in accordance with the rules in force at that time. Depite all this, the Deputy Commissioner, Bhiwani, on 26th August, 1988, set aside' the order of promotion of the petitioner dated 19th February, 1982, and reverted him to the post of Octroi Clerk. Apprehending his reversion, the petitioner approached Civil Court for grant of injunction also but finding no success, he has challenged the impugned order of his reversion by way of the writ petition, mainly on the ground that since the post of Inspector Octroi was in existence prior to 15th February, 1982, when the new Rules came into force, that post could still be filled by the competent authority mentioned under the old rules, no matter the actual order of promotion was issued later than the publication or enforcement of the new Rules.

(3.) IN the written statement, the factual position has been admitted and the only plea aken by the respondents is that after 15th February, l982, when the new rules had come into force, the order of promotion of the petitioner issued on 19th February, 1982, was illegal and had been rightly set aside by the Deputy Commissioner, Bhiwani on 26th August 1988, by the impugned order.