VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA Vs. HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSIONER, HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges the orders issued on 09.06.2010, 22.09.2010 and 21.11.2011 filed along with the writ petition as Annexures P- 21, P-23 and P-27, respectively. Annexure P-21 is a letter of communication from the Principal rejecting the petitioner's claim for being placed higher in the order of seniority to the 5 th respondent. Annexure P-23 affirms the decision as regards the issue of seniority and Annexure P-27 is one rejecting the application of the petitioner appointing the 5 th respondent as officiating Principal of the College on the ground that the 5 th respondent has to be treated as senior.

(2.) It is a matter of record that is not denied that the 5 th respondent has joined as the Director of Physical Education on 07.08.1978 while the petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer later having joined the College on 12.08.1981. At the time of their respective entry into service, the 5 th respondent had been placed on a scale of Rs.300-600 w.e.f. .07.08.1978 and later raised to Rs.550-900 w.e.f. 01.08.1980 while the petitioner had been placed in the scale of Rs.700-1600. The scales obtained parity, when the post of Director of Physical Education was re-designated as Lecturer in Physical Education through a letter issued by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government, Education Department.

(3.) In the seniority list, which had been circulated on 11.10.1988 to the College, the 5 th respondent had been shown in Sr. No.24 while the petitioner had been shown in Sr. No.27. The petitioner had an objection to the manner in which the seniority list had been drawn and he had objected to the list through a representation dated 22.10.1988. He has followed it with another representation on 13.02.1989 and when the representation did not immediately evoke any response, the petitioner has directed a communication to the Dean of Colleges, Kurukshetra University through the Principal seeking for an appropriate assignment of the seniority positions and pleaded that all Lecturers in Physical Education could not be treated at par with Lecturers before 06.09.1988 since the parity obtained only through a communicated dated 19.08.1988. The petitioner's attempt was, therefore, to show that for appointments that have taken place prior to 19.08.1988 a Lecturer in Physical Education ought not to be treated at par with a Lecturer in any other academic subject. The Kurukshetra University through the Assistant Registrar had informed that the fixation of seniority was being taken up with the Director of Higher Education (DHE), Haryana and they were awaiting the clarification from D.H.E. Haryana. There has been nothing brought on record on the side of the petitioner that after communication from the Assistant Registrar on 28.08.1989 informing that the matter was under consideration, the petitioner ever took up the issue against either the College or the University or at least the Government that the seniority could not be finalized.