JOGINDER SINGH SETHI Vs. PUNJAB GOV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short, but significant controversy raised in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India relates to the interpretation of Government instructions, dated July 30, 1970 (printed at page 178) of the Government publication known as (Compendium of Punjab Government Instructions, 1977 edition), (hereinafter a reference to the pages of this book would only be made whenever necessary) and their clarification, - -vide Government instructions No. 4/2/79 -SW. 1/7649, dated January 7, 1980. The controversy between the parties is decided with reference to the facts which relate to the point of time when it was filed on August 25, 1581. The following undisputed facts give rise to the various contentions raised.

(2.) THE Petitioners and Respondents Nos. 3 to 6, who are employed as Clerks and Junior Scale Stenographers in the office of the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department, Punjab, Chandigarh, and undisputably have a common seniority, are entitled to be promoted to the posts of Assistants in the said department. Petitioners are senior to Respondents Nos. 3 to 6 as per the seniority list, Annexure P. 2. These Respondents who belong to Scheduled Castes/Tribes and Backward Classes, were likely to be promoted when this petition was filed. On the basis of the above noted instructions relating to reservation in the services of the State for such members of the society. As the anticipated promotions of these Respondents were not stayed at the time of the motion hearing of the petition, they have admittedly been so promoted during the pendency of this petition. Obviously these promotions and a few other similar promotions on the same basis during the pendency of this petition are subject to the result of this petition.

(3.) THE primary contention raised in this petition is that out of the cadre strength of 202 posts of Assistants, the members of Scheduled Castes/Tribes and Backward Classes are entitled to only 42 posts and there being already 47 members of this category in that cadre, they were already in excess of the percentage of 22 per cent reserved for such categories of people. Though this factual position is not disputed by the Respondents - -official as well as non -official the explanation on their side is that out of the 47 persons holding the posts of Assistants in this department on the date when thin petition was filed, 10 incumbents belonging to the Scheduled Castes had been promoted in their own right in the general list on the basis of their seniority -cum -merit and had not availed of the above -noted instructions relating to the reservation of posts and -thus according to these Respondents there being only 38 persons who had been promoted against the reserved paints as per the roster prescribed hi the instructions at page 107, the representation of this class of people is still less than the prescribed norm.