HEM LATA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The eight petitioners before this Court belong to the Ministerial cadre of the Haryana Public Relations Department. They were initially appointed as Clerks and, thereafter, earned promotion as Assistants. Presently, there are working on different posts including those of Accountant, Section In-charge, Press Facility Assistant, Auditor, Sales Manager etc. Their conditions of service are governed by the rules framed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India promulgated vide notification dated 24.4.1998 and called the Haryana Public Relations Department Headquarters Establishment-Ministerial Wing (Group-C) Service Rules, 1998. Rule 9 (1) (II) of these rules provides the method of recruitment to different posts including the post of Deputy Superintendent, Section Incharge, Assistant Production Officer (Distribution), Production Incharge, Personal Assistant etc. The recruitment to the post of Deputy Superintendent is either by promotion from amongst the specified categories or by transfer or by deputation out of the officials who is already in service of the State Government or the Government of India. The post of Senior Scale Stenographers is not mentioned as feeder cadre under Rule 9 (1) (II) which prescribes the method of recruitment.

(2.) The 3rd and 4th private respondents are both working as Senior Scale Stenographers. The Senior Scale Stenographers have a right to promotion under Rule 9(1) (VI) to the higher post of Personal Assistant. The further promotional post of Personal Assistant in their channel can be filled either by way of promotion from amongst Senior Scale Stenographers or by transfer or deputation from outside departments of State and Central Government.

(3.) The pay scale of Deputy Superintendents under Appendix A to Rule 3 is Rs. 1640-60-2600-EB-75-2900 (unrevised) as mentioned at Serial No.2 of the Appendix. The post of Personal Assistant at Serial No.6 carries the pay scales of Rs. 1600-50-2300-EB-60-2660+150 Special Pay (unrevised). Appendix B of the rules lay down academic qualifications and experience for both direct recruitment/transfer or for appointment by way of promotion. It is the case of the petitioners that Senior Scale Stenographers like respondents No.3 and 4 have their own channel of promotion as Personal Assistant but have no right to promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendents under the notified rules of service and other posts mentioned in Rule 9 (1) (II). However, Senior Scale Stenographers were included in the seniority list dated 31.3.2008 by placing their names in the list of Assistants/Cashiers. According to the petitioners, a joint seniority list could not be prepared and this act of the Department is unlawful. In this combined seniority list, respondents No.3 and 4 are placed higher to them. The petitioners state that they protested against the seniority list. They, however, did not litigate. They approached this Court in May, 2011complaining at that time that 5 more persons have been promoted as Senior Scale Stenographers vide order dated 11.3.2011 and their names have also to find mention in the joint seniority list consequential to the joint seniority list circulated in 2008 based on the same principle. This would further diminish the chances of promotion of the petitioners in their own channel as Deputy Superintendents and cause them heart burn, loss of seniority and delayed chances of promotion to their disadvantage by altering their conditions of service laid down in the rules.