SUKHBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was discharged from Army on account of disability in operation "VIJAY" held in Kargil, (J&K), has approached this Court impugning the order dated 06.05.2011/03.06.2011 (Annexure, P-4), whereby his claim for promotion from the post of Senior Assistant to Superintendent Grade-II, has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was serving in Army. He got seriously injured in Kargil War in operation "VIJAY" and was discharged from service. In terms of the policy dated 19.08.1999 issued by the State for appointments of Honour and Gratitude in the State Class-III and Class-IV service to the dependent members of the families of the War Heroes, the petitioner was offered appointment on the post of Senior Assistant in the office of District Sainik Welfare Officer, Amritsar vide letter dated 22.07.2002. War Heroes were offered appointments in terms of the policy including the persons, who are disabled while fighting War declared by the Government of India in Operation "VIJAY" at Kargil. Ever since, the petitioner was appointed, he was serving satisfactorily in the Department. As per the terms of the appointment, service of the petitioner is governed by Punjab Sainik Welfare (Class-III) Services Rules 1987 (for short "the Rules"), in terms of which on completion of eight years of service as Senior Assistant, the person is eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade-II. Though the petitioner has completed more than eight years of service, but has not been considered for promotion as Superintendent Grade-II, which is to be filled up by way of promotion. Representation made by the petitioner claiming promotion was rejected by the authority on the ground that in the Rules there is no provision for promotion of Senior Assistant by way of direct recruitment and the proposal has been sent to the Government regarding adjustment of directly recruited Senior Assistant, under Honour and Gratitude and for creating a separate cadre for them. While referring to Clause 15 of the policy, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it has been specifically provided therein that in case no vacancy exists in a particular office/department, a new post of direct quota will stand automatically created as temporary addition to the cadre and will be adjusted as and when next vacancy in that office/department of direct quota occurs. He further submitted that even if all the posts of Senior Assistant in the Department in terms of the Rules were to be filled up by way of promotion, as per the policy one post in the direct recruit quota stood automatically created and petitioner will be deemed to have been appointed against that post. He having satisfactory worked in the District Sainik Welfare Department as Senior Assistant for more than eight years, is fully eligible for promotion as Superintendent Grade-II.

(2.) On the other hand, contention of the learned counsel for the State is that as per the Rules all the posts of Senior Assistant were to be filled by way of promotion from Clerks and Welfare workers having a minimum five years experience. There is no post meant for direct recruitment quota, hence, appointment of the petitioner as Senior Assistant in the Department is not in terms of the Rules. As there is no quota prescribed in the Rules the petitioner is not entitled to promotion. He further submitted that the rules for taking care of such like appointments are still under finalization. He further submitted that even as per the Clause 15 of the policy an employee, who is appointed in a Department, where no vacancy exists and a new post is automatically created as temporary addition to adjust such an employee will be only against the next vacancy in that office/department against direct quota. As in the present case, till date there is no vacancy in the direct quota in the Department, the petitioner cannot be adjusted.

(3.) The fact that the petitioner was serving in Army and was discharged on account of disability-suffered by him during Kargil War, named as operation "VIJAY" is not in dispute. The Government had issued a policy on 19.08.1999 providing employment to the dependents of the War Heroes, who suffered disability in the War. The petitioner being eligible under the policy was offered appointment as Senior Assistant in the office of Punjab Sainik Welfare Department on 22.07.2002. It was in terms of the decision taken in a committee presided over by Chief Secretary, Punjab held on 26.06.2002. It has specifically been mentioned in the letter of appointment of the petitioner that service of the petitioner is to be governed by the Rules. As a consequence of the aforesaid appointment, the petitioner joined his service on 22.07.2002 and is working as Senior Assistant since then. The claim of the petitioner is that he deserves to be considered for promotion as Superintendent Grade-II having got experience of more than eight years while working as Senior Assistant. All the posts of Superintendent Grade-II are required to be filled up by way of promotion in terms of the Rules.