BHUPINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Mr.DS Patwalia, Advocate with Mr.Lalit Rishi, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Vivek Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for respondents 1 and 2 at length.

(2.) CHALLENGE in the present petition is to the order dated 18.5.1998, Annexure P7, whereby private respondents 3 to 5 have been promoted to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Wireless) subject to the approval of the Punjab Public Service Commission. It is the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner that such private respondents belonged to the cadre of Technicians and have been promoted in excess of their quota and against posts meant for the Wireless Operators. Further prayer has been made in the petition for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police against the Operators quota.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that in the Punjab Police Telecommunication, there are two cadres i.e. cadre of Technicians and cadre of Operators, and separate seniority lists of both such cadres have been maintained. Learned counsel has further referred to Civil Writ Petition No.6059 of 1990 wherein the respondents had filed an affidavit admitting themselves that the cadre of Operators and Technicians working in the Telecommunications wing of Punjab Police is not a common cadre. The claim raised in the aforementioned writ petition filed by certain Inspectors belonging to the operation cadre was that the cadre of Inspectors in the Operation and Technical Wing, as the case may be, be declared as one. Such writ petition was stated to have been dismissed and the matter was taken to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in terms of filing SLP No.10678 of 1991 wherein again the official respondents had re-iterated the stand that the cadre of Operators and Technicians is a separate cadre. Accordingly, learned counsel would contend that the DSPs (Technical) were already in excess of their quota even prior to the passing of the impugned order and as such, in terms of the order dated 18.5.1998, Annexure P7, the benefit of promotion having been granted to the private respondents 3 to 5 was in clear derogation to the rights of the petitioner who belongs to the Operator cadre.