RAJIV BHALLA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who were working as Junior Engineers in the Department of Rural Development and Panchayat, State of Punjab, were promoted as Sub Divisional Officers (Panchayati Raj) [for short to be referred as 'SDOs (PR)'] w.e.f. 6.4.1995 vide order dated 7.4.1995, Annexure P2, upon the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee (hereinafter to be referred as 'the DPC') in its meeting held on 27.6.1994. Thereafter, vide order dated 27.8.2001, Annexure P4, the petitioners were granted the benefit of ante-dated promotion to the post of SDO (PR) w.e.f. 27.6.1994 i.e. the date of the recommendations made by the DPC.

(2.) The challenge in the instant writ petition is to the order dated 9.5.2011, Annexure P12, whereby the order dated 27.8.2001 granting ante-dated promotion to the petitioners, has been withdrawn and the order dated 7.4.1995 promoting them as SDOs w.e.f. 6.4.1995 has been confirmed.

(3.) Facts, in brief, which are relevant for the controversy raised in the present petition are that the petitioners were appointed as Junior Engineers in the respondent-Department in the year 1981. Promotion from the post of Junior Engineer is to the post of SDO (PR). It has been pleaded that the petitioners were vested with the current duty charge of the post of SDO in their own pay scale on 7.4.1993 and 9.5.1994 respectively. A DPC was convened by the respondents on 27.6.1994 for purposes of consideration of the eligible officials to fill up the promotional quota in the cadre of SDOs. In terms of order dated 7.4.1995, Annexure P2, the petitioners along with nine other officials were promoted to the post of SDO (PR) w.e.f. 6.4.1995. It so transpires that the petitioners thereafter raised a claim that since they were already officiating on the higher post i.e. SDO (PR), they be granted the benefit of regular promotion with effect from the date of the recommendations of the DPC i.e. 27.6.1994 on the basis that they were fully eligible in terms of their length of service and the qualifications held. Apparently, advice was sought by the respondent-Department as regards the claim raised by the petitioners from the Department of Personnel, State of Punjab and the following advice was tendered on 8.12.2000 by the Additional Secretary (Personnel):