ASHOK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is working on the post of Assistant in the office of Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak has filed the instant writ petition impugning an order dated 01.09.2000 (Annexure P-6), whereby respondent No.4 was promoted from the post of Steno Typist to the post of Stenographer. Challenge has also been made in the present writ petition to an order dated 19.05.2012 (Annexure P-11) in terms of which, the representation filed by the petitioner against the order of promotion of private respondent No.4 in the year 2004 has been rejected. Still further, the petitioner has sought the quashing of the final seniority list of Assistants of Rohtak Division, Rohtak issued on 03.12.2008 (Annexure P-7).

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has been heard at length.

(3.) A perusal of the impugned order at Annexure P-11 dated 19.05.2012 would reveal that respondent No.4 after having been promoted to the post of Stenographer on 01.09.2000 has thereafter been promoted to the post of Personal Assistant. After earning promotion on the post of Stenographer in the year 2000, a tentative seniority list of the cadre of Stenographer has been issued on 20.06.2007 but apparently, no objection had been raised by the petitioner at that point of time against the grant of promotion of respondent No.4 to the post of Stenographer as also his consequential fixation of seniority in the cadre of Stenographers. The seniority list thereafter was finalized in the year 2008. It is after finalization of such seniority list that respondent No.4 has been further promoted to the post of Personal Assistant on 02.01.2012. It is only in terms of filing a representation dated 08.05.2012 (Annexure P-10) that the petitioner has first in point of time objected to the grant of promotion to the private respondent No.4 to the post of Stenographer in the year 2000 as also raised a challenge to the seniority in the cadre of Stenographers in relation to which a tentative seniority list that was circulated in the year 2007 and finalized in the year 2008. Accordingly, vide impugned order dated 19.05.2012 (Annexure P-11) passed by the Commissioner, Rohtak Range, Rohtak, the representation of the petitioner, apart from other grounds has been dismissed on the ground of delay.