RAKESH BHARDWAJ AND ANOTHER Vs. PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT CHANDIGARH THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners 1 and 2, who were presently working as Steno typists at the District & Sessions Division, Ambala, have a grievance that in the manner of preparation of seniority and promotion, the 3rd respondent had been placed above the petitioners and promoted to the post as Judgment Writer (Junior Division), purportedly against the relevant rules relating to the transfer from one division to another. There is no dispute about the fact that in the hierarchy from the post of Steno-typist, a still higher post is Judgment Writer (Junior Division), the next in order is Stenographer Grade-I and the further promotion post is to the post of Judgment Writer (Senior Grade). The promotion to the post of Judgment Writer (Junior Division) is on the basis of seniority-cum-merit after completion of 3 years in the post as a Steno typist.

(2.) The 3rd respondent was a Steno typist at Gurgaon, having been appointed originally on 09.10.1996 and promoted as a Judgment Writer (Junior Division) on 24.08.2000 at the Sessions Division at Gurgaon. The 3rd respondent came on a voluntary transfer to Ambala and he had been placed junior most in the cadre of Judgment Writers. In terms of Rule 10 of the Haryana Subordinate Courts Establishment (Recruitment and General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997, a member of service may be transferred to any equivalent post within the Sessions Division by the District & Sessions Judge; Every member of the service shall be liable to transfer under the order of the Chief Justice anywhere within the State; and on a written request by the employee, a person could be transferred anywhere within the State by the High Court if the post was available subject to the condition, inter alia, that he would not claim any seniority over and above the officials already working in the cadre of the Sessions Division to which he was seeking transfer.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioners would contend that there are two objections for treating the 3rd respondent in the order of seniority above the petitioners. One, on the day when the transfer was made at the request of the 3rd respondent, the petitioners had completed 3 years as Steno typist and they had, therefore, become eligible for consideration of promotion to the next higher post as Judgment Writers. When the 3rd respondent had been transferred, it was on a wrong assumption that the post was available at the Sessions Division at Ambala. There were only two posts as Judgment Writers at Ambala and the petitioners were entitled to consideration in the other post. The second objection that the petitioners would have, is that the reference to the fact that a person coming on a transfer would be placed lowest in the cadre of the Sessions Division to which he was seeking a transfer must be understood from the context that Steno typist and Judgment Writers (Junior Grade) had all been placed in the same cadre and in terms of the seniority list relied on by the official respondents (Annexure R-2/7), both the Steno typist and Judgment Writers (Junior Division) had been placed in the same cadre.