AMAR CHAND Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Some Up-Vaidyas, who were working as such in the Ayurvedic Department, Punjab, filed various writ petitions in this Court (CWP Nos. 2426, 2427 and 2727 of 1987) claiming the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents that they should be promoted as Vaidyas with effect from the dates their juniors were so promoted. During the pendency of the writ petitions, an order was passed on 14th July, 1987 (Annexure P-1 to the writ petition) promoting the petitioners in those cases, as well as the petitioner in the present case, to the posts of Vaidyas. This order of promotion was brought to the notice of the Bench hearings those writ petitions and the writ petitions were disposed of on 6th August, 1987. It was noticed that the order of promotion, dated 14th July, 1987 did not take account of the effect of the promotions of the persons junior to the petitioners in those cases and did not effect the promotions of the petitioners from such dates when their juniors were promoted. Consequently, a direction was given that if on the date on which the persons juniors to the petitioners were promoted, the petitioners' records and qualifications warrant promotions, then promotions given to those petitioners by the order dated 14th July, 1987 shall be given effect from such a date.

(2.) In pursuance of the order of this Court, the petitioners in those cases were given retrospective date of promotion as Vaidyas with effect from 19th November, 1980. The present petitioner who was not a petitioner in the earlier cases, was not given retrospective date of promotion, though all the petitioners in the earlier cases were admittedly junior to the petitioner as Up-Vaidyas. The petitioner made representation that he should also be given promotion as Vaidya with effect from the date his juniors had been given promotion. One Shri Suraj Bhan, who was a writ petitioner in CWP No. 2727 of 1987 filed a contempt petition in this Court with the allegation that the judgment in his case had not been complied with fully, inasmuch as he had not been assigned the same date of promotion as Vaidya when his junior was promoted. According to him, his junior had been promoted with effect from 24th February, 1972 and not from 19th November, 1980, which was the date of promotion as Vaidya given to him by the respondents. After considering the facts brought out by Shri Suraj Bhan, the respondents passed an order on 18th September, 1990 giving him deemed date of promotion as Vaidya with effect from 24th February, 1972 (the date when his junior had been promoted as such).

(3.) This writ petition was failed in November, 1990, claiming that the petitioner should also be assigned the same date of promotion as Vaidya as that of Shri Suraj Bhan, who was junior to the petitioner as Up-Vaidya.