LAWS(P&H)-2003-1-190

GIRDHARI LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On January 29, 2003
GIRDHARI LAL Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner No. 1-Girdhari Lal, who possesses the qualification of Matric with Diploma in Mechanical, joined service as Storekeeper in Haryana Roadways w.e.f. 20.2.1974. Petitioner No. 2-Lal Chand is a Matriculate. He joined service as Storekeeper on 4.2.1971. They have jointly filed this petition with the prayer that appointment of respondent No. 2-Nand Lal as Store Purchase Assistant by transfer from the Post of Junior Auditor may be declared illegal and respondent No. 1 may be directed to promote them on that post as per rules.

(2.) The main plank of the petitioners' challenge to order Annexure P.1 dated 16.4.1985 vide which respondent No. 2 was appointed as Store Purchase Assistant is that he does not fulfil the qualifications prescribed under the Draft Rules, i.e., Haryana Transport Department (State Service Class-III) Rules, 1983 which are being followed by the department for regulating recruitment to Class-III posts in Haryana Roadways. The other ground on which they have challenged the appointment of respondent No. 2 as Store Purchase Assistant is the violation of Article 16 of the Constitution. According to them, the post of Store Purchase Assistant can be filled by direct recruitment and/or promotion but respondent No. 1 did not consider their candidature and appointed respondent No. 2 even though he is not qualified for recruitment from either sources.

(3.) The stand taken by respondent No. 1 is that respondent No. 2 was appointed as Store Purchase Assistant by transfer from the post of Junior Auditor because pay scales of both the posts were identical. Respondent No. 1 has controverted the petitioners' challenge to the appointment of respondent No. 2 on the ground of violation of the rules and Article 16 of the Constitution by asserting that the Draft Rules do not have the force of law and the appointment of respondent No. 2 does not result in depriving them of their right to be considered for promotion. It has also controverted the averment contained in the writ petition that the Draft Rules are in the nature of instructions issued by the government for making recruitment to Class-III posts including the post of Store Purchase Assistant.