PARDEEP KUMAR Vs. PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is presently serving on the post of Peon in the Court of District & Sessions Judge, Shri Muktsar Sahib, having been appointed as such on a compassionate basis, has filed the instant writ petition seeking adjustment against a vacant post of Process Server. Briefly noticed, father of the petitioner namely Sh. Ashok Kumar died in harness on 11.9.2008 while serving as Bailiff in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Malout. Mother of the petitioner submitted an application dated 2.12.2008 seeking appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground on the post of Process Server. Such application was duly processed and the Registrar (General) of this Court vide letter dated 10.9.2009 addressed to the District & Sessions Judge, Faridkot directed the appointment of the petitioner to a Class-IV post on compassionate basis. Accordingly, the petitioner was issued an appointment letter dated 7.10.2009 on the post of Peon. He submitted his joining report on 23.10.2009.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it was in the month of June, 2011 that the petitioner became aware that one post of Process Server is lying vacant in the Court of District & Sessions Judge, Shri Muktsar Sahib and consequently submitted a representation on 7.6.2011 to be adjusted against such post. Counsel has strenuously argued that the action of the respondent-authorities in not having acceded to his request, is arbitrary. It has been argued that the post of Peon as also Process Server are Class-IV posts under the Punjab Subordinate Courts Establishment (Recruitment & General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997 and as such the petitioner could have been adjusted even against the post of Process Server, which otherwise carries higher emoluments than the post of Peon. Counsel has also submitted that the petitioner possesses the qualifications of Matriculation with Punjabi and Hindi as subjects and has passed the Senior Secondary Examination in March, 1998 and thereafter has qualified the Industrial Training qualification in the trade of Information Technology in the year 2001. As per counsel, since the petitioner possessed the requisite qualifications for being appointed on the post of Process Server at the time of initial submission of application in the year 2008, he had a vested right to be appointed on the post of Process Server instead that of Peon. Towards such submission, reliance has been placed upon a judgement of this Court rendered in case of Tarsem Kumar Sehgal v. State of Punjab and another,1986 3 SLR 774

(3.) Mr. Vikas Bahl, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would advert to the joint written statement filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 and would contend that the petitioner had been offered appointment of a Class-IV post i.e. the post of a Peon in compliance of the order dated 10.9.2009 issued by this Court at Annexure P-5 and the petitioner having duly accepted such post without any protest or demur, no further right vests in him for claiming appointment/adjustment on the post of Process Server on a compassionate basis having worked for more than two years on the post of Peon.