JAGDISH CHAND AGGARWALA Vs. THE HARYANA STATE FEDERATION OF CONSUMERS CORPORATION WHOLESALE STORES LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner joined the service of Haryana State Federation of Consumers Corporation Wholesale Stores Limited, Chandigarh (hereinafter called Confed) on 10.1.1977 as Storekeeper in the pay scale of Rs. 200 -10 -300 -15 -450 on probation basis. He successfully completed the probation period and his services were regularised in the year 1978. The Common Cadre Rules 1975 lays down the service conditions and method of recruitment to various posts including that of Storekeeper and his service conditions are governed thereunder. Prior to the coming into force of the Common Cadre Rules, the posts of Storekeepers, Assistants,' Clerks and Salesmen in the various Central Cooperative Consumers Stores having their different managements in the State of Haryana were being filled up by the managements of the Central Cooperative Consumers Stores, irrespective of their qualifications, eligibility and pay scales. Thus all the Storekeepers working in such Stores were getting different consolidated salary and no regular pay scales were given to them up to 22.4.1979. In pursuance of Rule 1.3 of the Common Cadre Rules, respondent No. 1 included the ex -cadre posts of the various Stores into the cadre posts w.e.f. 23.4.1979 as per Annexure P -l. Thus, the services of respondents No. 2 to 7 and various other employees were taken over on its cadre by respondent No. 1 w.e.f. 23.4.1979 from the managements of various Stores. Respondents No. 2 to 7 were drawing much less salary as compared to the petitioner.

(2.) IN May, 1979, a tentative seniority list was prepared. The petitioner being the seniormost was entitled to be placed at serial No. 1 on the basis of his length of service in the Confed and on the basis of higher pay scale, but to his utter dismay he was shown at serial No. 19 and respondents No. 2 to 7 and others were shown senior to the petitioner. The seniority list is Annexure P -2. The representation submitted by the petitioner for assigning him correct place in the final seniority list had no effect, therefore, the present civil writ petition is filed for quashing the impugned seniority list Annexure P -5. He has also prayed for issuance of directions to respondent No. 1 to promote him to the post of Assistant Manager w.ith effect from the date when his juniors have been promoted.

(3.) 1 have heard Shri G.C. Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.P. Bhandari, learned Counsel for respondent No. I and Shri D.S.Bali, learned Counsel Advocate assisted by Mr. D.V. Gupta, Advocate for, respondents No. 2 and 3.