MOHINDER SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, petitioners who are lecturers, are impugning order dated 17.8.1983 (Annexure P-4) vide which they were reverted to the post of Inspector. They are also seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing respondents No. 1 and 2 to consider the petitioners for appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar in preference to the Inspectors/Statistical Assistants who are in a lower rank to the petitioners.

(2.) In brief, the facts are that petitioners joined as Sub-Inspectors in the Punjab Co-operative Department. Both the petitioners were appointed and promoted to the post of Inspector on 8.11.1967 and 15.5.1970 respectively. On 4.1.1980, the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Punjab (respondent No. 2) invited options from all the Inspectors for the post of Lecturers. Petitioners along with three other persons gave option to be appointed as Lecturers. The names of said three persons are Babu Singh (respondent No. 3), Avtar Singh Mahli and Sham Singh. The options of Babu Singh and Avtar Singh Mahli were accepted, but when offered the post, they refused to join as such. Sham Singh and petitioner No. 1 were appointed as Lecturers vide letter dated 15.4.1980. Petitioner No. 2 who had also given his option on the basis of letter dated 4.1.1930 (Annexure P-1) was also appointed as Lecturer w.e.f. 15.5.1980. In November, 1982, options were again invited for the post of Lecturer. This time, Babu Singh, Hardial Singh and Jasbir Singh, Inspectors, sent their options. Out of these three, Hardial Singh and Jasbir Singh were appointed to the post of Lecturer. At the time when the petitioners were appointed as lecturers, the pay scales of the post of Inspector and Lecturer were identical. This was because of order dated 22.3.1980 vide which these post were given the running pay scale of Rs. 570-1080/- w.e.f. 1.1.1978. According to the petitioners their conditions of service are governed by the rules called the Punjab Co-operative Department (State Service) Class-III, Rules, 1978 (in short 'the Class-III rules'). Under these Class-III rules, the post of Lecturer is to be filled 60% by way of promotion from amongst the Inspectors/Statistical Assistants and remaining 40% by way of direct recruitment. On the date of enforcement of these rules, post of Lecturer carried the pay scale of Rs. 350-500/- whereas the pay scale of the post of Inspector was Rs. 200-400/-. Since the pay scales of the post of Inspector and Lecturer were made identical, some of the Lecturers represented to the Government that the post of Lecturer is in higher cadre and under the Class- III rules, the said post is to be filled by way of promotion from amongst the Inspectors. and for that matter, the action of the Government in bringing the pay scale of the Inspector at par with the Lecturer, is arbitrary. The representation of the Lecturers was accepted by the Anomaly Committee by an order dated 18.2.1983 and consequently, the pay scale of Lecturers was revised from Rs. 570-1080/- to Rs. 700-1200/- w.e.f. 1.1.1978. Respondent No. 2 again invited options for the post of Lecturer vide letter dated 7.6.1983. In response to this, four Inspectors namely, Babu Singh (respondent No. 3), J.R. Bagga (respondent No. 4), Puran Singh and Shakti Sarup, gave their options. By an order dated 17.8.1983, Babu Singh and J.R. Bagga, i.e. respondents No. 3 and 4 respectively, were appointed as Lecturers and the petitioners were ordered to be reverted to the Post of Inspector. Petitioners are impugning the order of their reversion and appointment of respondents No. 3 and 4 to the Post of Lecturer in the present writ petition. In addition to this, petitioners have also prayed that they were entitled to be considered for further promotion i.e. from the post of Lecturer, a Class-III post, to the post of Assistant Registrar a Class-II post.

(3.) In answer to the averments made in the writ petition, Respondents No. 1 and 2 as well as private respondents No. 3 and 4 have filed their written statements. According to the respondents the pay scales of Lecturers/Inspectors. Statistical Assistants were identical and, therefore, there was no question of making promotion from one post to another. According to them, the vacancies used to be filled by inviting options from Inspectors/Statistical Assistants to avoid dislocation as there was no financial benefit to those officials who opted for posting as Lecturer. They have further stated that before 1.1.1978 the pay scale of the post of Lecturer was Rs. 350-500/- and this post used to be filled from the graduate Inspectors on the basis of seniority-cum-merit. On the basis of recommendation of the Punjab Pay Commission Report, the pay scales of the post of Lecturer and Inspector, Co-operative Societies, were made identical i.e. Rs. 570-1080/- w.e.f. 1.1. 1978 by the Finance Department. Since the pay scales of both these posts were the same, the vacancies of Lecturers were filled by inviting options. The Finance Department vide letter dated 18.2.1983 revised the pays scale of Lecturers from Rs. 570-1080/- to Rs. 700-1200/- w.e.f. 1.1.1978 and, thus on the basis of seniority-cum-merit, respondents No. 3 and 4 were appointed as Lecturers in the pay scale of Rs. 700-1200/- withdrawing petitioners from the post of Lecturer, being very junior to respondents No. 3 and 4. In regard to the claim of the petitioners for further promotion as Assistant Registrar, the respondents have stated that the post of the petitioners, i.e. Lecturer, did not involve any promotion and, therefore, they were not entitled to be considered for promotion as Assistant Registrar.