VISHWA MITTER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide orders dated January 18, 1982, respondent No. 4, Mr. R.K. Kundra, who was working as Senior Scale Stenographer in the office of Principal, Medical College, Amritsar, was posted as Superintendent Grade-III in his own scale of pay against a vacant post. In the order of promotion it was mentioned that he is being posted "in his own pay scale till the case regarding amendment in the Punjab Civil Service (Promotions of Stenographers and Steno-typists) Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1961 Rules") is made by the Government and their inter se seniority in the clerical cadre is finalised and fulfils requisite experience." In the order it was also mentioned that the promotees "shall be on probation for a period of one year......" Vide orders dated December 13, 1984, the Government decided that "Shri R.K. Kundra be appointed as Superintendent Grade III in accordance with the instructions issued by Punjab Government vide Memo No. 9715-5HBII-75/18650 dated 19/20.8.1975 and he may be allowed pay scale increments as Superintendent Grade III w.e.f. January, 1982 i.e. the date of promotion order issued by your office. This promotion will, however, be on provisional basis till the joint seniority list of Senior Scale Stenographers and Head Assistants is finalised by your office and it will not affect the claim of any other official found senior to him subsequently." Aggrieved by these orders, the petitioner who-claims to be senior-to-respondent No. 4, submitted representations to the Government. Copies of some of those representations have been appended as Annexures P.5 to P.10 with the writ petition vide orders dated June 18, 1985 (Annexure P.11) the petitioner was informed that his representation has been examined in detail by the Government and has been "rejected." Aggrieved by the action of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in promoting respondent No. 4 to the post of Superintendent Grade-III and in rejecting his representation the petitioner has approached this Court through the present writ petition.

(2.) In a nutshell the petitioner claims that the promotion of respondent No. 4 was wholly illegal and contrary to the statutory rules governing the promotions of Senior Scale Stenographers to the post of Superintendent Grade-III. It has been averred that the respondent was wholly ineligible for this promotion as he had not passed the Assistant Grade Examination nor had he ever worked on the post of Assistant as required under the rules. On these premises, it is claimed that the promotion was violative of the rules and the guarantee enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. It is also averred that according to the seniority list issued by the Government vide letter dated April 17, 1979, the petitioner was placed at Sr. No. 28 while respondent No. 4 had been placed at Sr. No. 106. However, in the seniority list issued vide letter dated April 1, 1985, respondent No. 4 had been shown senior to the petitioner on the ground of promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade-III. It is averred that the change in seniority was wholly violative of principles of natural justice. On these premises, it has been claimed that the appointment of respondent No. 4 to the post of Superintendent Grade-III prior to the petitioner be quashed. It has also been claimed that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to consider and promote the petitioner w.e.f. a date earlier to the one on which respondent No. 4 had been promoted.

(3.) Written statements have been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and respondent No. 4. It has been inter alia averred that respondent No. 4 was promoted as Senior Scale Stenographer in the pay scale of Rs. 150-300 in August, 1966. At that time the petitioner was working as Assistant/Accountant in the pay scale Rs. 106-200. It has been pointed out that respondent No. 4 was promoted to the post of Superintendent Grade-III in accordance with the advice tendered by the Government vide Memorandum dated August 19/20, 1975, according to which, a Senior Scale Stenographer became eligible for promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade-III after completion of five years of service. It has also been averred that the provisions of the 1961 Rules do not apply in this case. The respondent have further pointed out that the requirement of passing the Assistant Grade Examination was introduced w.e.f. April 12, 1984 when the rules called The Punjab State Assistant Grade Examination Rules, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1984 Rules') were implemented. The promotion of respondent No. 4 having been made prior to the promulgation of these rules, he was not required to pass the Assistant Grade Examination. A copy of the letter dated August 19/20, 1975 has been produced alongwith the written statement. This conveys the decision of the Government of Punjab by which it has been laid down that in the subordinate offices of the Punjab Government, Head Assistants with five years of experience in the Sub-offices of the Punjab Health Directorate or Senior Scale Stenographer with five years of experience as Stenographer will be eligible for promotion to the post of Superintendent in the scale of Rs. 300-550.