RAM SARUP SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who are under graduates, joined Public Relations Department in the erstwhile State of Punjab, as Clerks in the year 1962, 1961 and 1962 and were promoted to the rank of Accountant/ICA on 25.5.1970, 25.5.1970 and 17.7.1970 respectively. Petitioners No. 1 and 2 were promoted as Superintendents in the year 1978 and 1982 respectively and they have been officiating as Deputy Public Relations Officer (for short DPRO)/Public Relations Officers (for short PRO) from time to time. Petitioner No. 1 is still, officiating as DPRO for over one year whereas petitioner No. 3 is officiating as Assistant Public Relations Officer (for short APRO) since April, 1980. It has been stated in the petition that petitioner No. 3 also officiated as DPRO on one occasion. Rules applicable in the erstwhile State of Punjab in regard to promotion of the petitioners were Punjab Public Relations Department Service Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the 1958 Rules). As per Rule 9(h) of the 1958 Rules, promotion to the posts of DPRO and APRO was to be made by selection from amongst Head Assistants, Assistants, APRO, Article Writers, Assistants and Sales Manager or by transfer or deputation of a person already in the service of the Government of the State or Union or by direct appointment.

(2.) At the time of reorganisation of States in 1966, petitioners were members of Class-III Service of Punjab Public Relations Department and 1958 Rules were applicable to them with regard to their promotion. On reorganisation of the States, petitioners were allocated to the State of Haryana. In the year 1975, the 1958 Rules were amended and Haryana Public Relations (State Service Class II) Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 1975 Rules) came into being. As per Rule 13 of 1975 Rules, all promotions from one grade to another were to be made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit. With the amendment of 1975 Rules, more categories were added for being promoted to the posts of DPRO/PRO and the ratio between direct recruits and the promotees was to 2 : 1 respectively. Even under the 1975 Rules, petitioners were eligible for being considered for promotion to the posts of DPRO/PRO. Under the 1975 Rules, before the petitioners could be considered for promotion to the posts of DPRO/PRO, had to have 10 years' experience as Assistants/ICAs and Accountants at District Headquarters. Admittedly, petitioners became eligible to be promoted as DPRO/PRO on 25.5.1980, 25.5.1980 and 17.7.1980 respectively. Six posts of DPRO/PRO out of the promotion quota became vacant by May, 1987 and the petitioners were eligible for being promoted to these posts. However, these posts were not filled up on regular basis and the petitioners and some other persons worked on these posts on officiating basis in their own pay scales. Haryana Government (Public Relations Department) vide, notification dated 28th November, 1988 amended 1975 Rules and the Haryana (Public Relations (State Service Class II ) First Amendment Rules, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 1988 Rules) were framed. With the amendment, the petitioners were rendered ineligible for the post of DPRO/PRO. As per 1975 Rules 15 categories were eligible for being promoted to the post of DPRO/PRO but by the 1988 Rules, out of the 15 categories,- 9 were deleted. No academic qualification was necessary for being promoted to the post of DPRO/PRO under the 1958 Rules and 1975 Rules but by the 1988 Rules, minimum qualification was raised from graduation but experience of APRO was reduced from 5 years to 3 years. Under the 1988 Rules besides being a graduate, the Superintendents were further required to hold a degree or diploma in journalism or one year's course from the Institute of Mass Communication. The ratio between the promotees and direct recruits was also reduced to 1 : 1.

(3.) The petitioners have challenged the 1988 Rules by way of present writ petition. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Rules cannot be amended to the disadvantage of the petitioners in view of Section 82(6) of the Punjab Reorganisation Act as no prior approval of the Central Government was obtained before amending the 1975 Rules. It has also been agitated that the petitioners had already acquired a right for being considered for promotion to the post of DPRO/PRO and the same cannot be taken away by amendment of the 1975 Rules as the same has retrospective operation.