RAVI DUTT SHARMA Vs. HARYANA HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can the seniority fixed by the Board be upset by the Government without hearing the petitioner who was likely to be adversely affected and did the Government at all have the jurisdiction to upset the decision of the Board are the two basic issues that arise in this case.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Draftsman (Civil) on 4.12.1972. He actually joined on 15.12.1972. He claims to have been confirmed as Assistant Draftsman with effect from 15.12.1973. The petitioner further claims that the post of Head Draftsman (Civil) was advertised in the Hindustan Times of 13.6.1974. He claims that he was duly selected. The petitioner claims that he was appointed as Head Draftsman vide letter dated 22.8.1974 and he joined as such on 2.9.1974.

(3.) It is further averred in the petition that respondent No. 5 possessed the qualification of certificate in the mechanical trade. He was initially appointed as Head Draftsman (Civil) in the Haryana Housing Board (for short 'the Board'). However, his work and conduct having been found to be wholly unsatisfactory, his services were terminated with effect from 24.10.1973. He was again appointed on ad hoc basis as Assistant Draftsman on 26.10.1973 on which post he joined on 30.10.1973.