SUKHDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein was recruited as Clerk on Feb. 25, 1967. He was promoted as Assistant on July 17, 1979. On Dec. 10, 1982 the petitioner was promoted to the post of Superintendent Grade-IV. A copy of this order is at Annexure P.2. On Aug. 30,1984, the petitioner was still further promoted to the post of Superintendent Grade-II. A copy of this order is at Annexure P. 3 with the writ petition. On Dec. 19, 1986, the Financial Commissioner (Revenue) accepted the representation submitted by respondent No. 6 and ordered-the petitioners reversion to the post of Assistant. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has approached this Court through the present writ petition.

(2.) The primary submission made on behalf of the petitioner is that respondent No. 6, when was senior to the petitioner as Clerk and Assistant was duly considered at the time of the petitioners selection and promotion to time to the post of Superintendent Grade-IV as well as that of Superintendent Grade-II. He had even filed a Civil Suit challenging the appointment of the petitioner. The Civil Court had rejected his claim vide orders dated Nov. 16, 1985 passed by Sub Judge 1st Class, Bhatinda. It is averred that in spite of these facts, the representation of respondent No. 6 had been accepted without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

(3.) In the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents it has been inter alia averred that the petitioner had been promoted to the post of Superintendent Grade-IV and Superintendent Grade-II on purely ad hoc basis and could be reverted at any time without assigning any reason. It has been further mentioned that the civil suit filed by respondent No. 6 had not been decided on merits, but had only been dismissed on a statement made by the official. With regard to the averment that the petitioner had not been given any notice of representation filed by respondent No. 6, it has been averred as under in the written statement filed by respondents Nos. 1 and 2:-