SOM PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are employees of Irrigation Department, Haryana. They were appointed as Tracers. Petitioner No. 1 was promoted as a Draftsman on 23.11.1981 and petitioners No.2 and 3 were promoted as Draftsman on 1.10.1981. Subsequently, vide office order dated 1.8.1983 (Annexure P-6) all the three petitioners were reverted to the original posts of Tracers. This was done because three posts of Draftsman were declared surplus.

(2.) The petitioners have challenged their reversion hi the present writ petition on the grounds. Firstly it is stated that the petitioners were promoted within the quota of promotees and if some posts had been declared surplus, the direct recruits who were beyond their quota, should have been reverted. The second ground of attack is that the reversion order has been passed by the Chief Engineer on 1.8.1983 whereas on that date, as per Rule 5 of the Haryana Irrigation Department Draftsmen and Tracers Group 'C' Service Rules, 1982, the appointing authority was the Engineer-in-Chief. Thus, according to the petitioners, it is only the Engineer-in-chief who could have passed the order of their reversion.

(3.) On notice, written statement has been filed in which it has been stated that on three posts of Draftsmen being declared surplus, the petitioners being the junior most were reverted. Regarding the other objection, it has been stated that there is no difference between the Chief Engineer and the Engineer-in-chief because one of the Chief Engineers is designated as Engineer-in-chief as an overall Incharge of the department.