RAJ KAUR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has primarily approached this Court impugning the order dated 24.05.2013 (Annexure P -9), vide which private respondents No. 4 to 10, who belong to the reserved category, have been promoted to the post of Matron despite the fact that the petitioner is senior to the said respondents in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ajit Singh Janjua vs. State of Punjab, : 1999 (4) RSJ 211 SC, which clearly lays down the principle of catching up if the reserved category candidate who is junior to the feeder cadre is promoted to a higher post because of the benefit granted to such person of reservation but on promotion of a general Category candidate to the said cadre, the person, who was senior in the feeder cadre, shall be treated as senior in the promotional cadre as well and granted the pay scale and other consequential benefits. Even the Haryana Government Instructions envisage the same and only one of the decision of the Government of Haryana, which could have been an impediment to the petitioner for claiming the said benefit, was Instructions dated 16.03.2006 (Annexure P -3), which have been struck down by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2012 in CWP No. 17280 of 2011 titled as Prem Kumar Verma and others vs. State of Haryana (Annexure P -4). It is further asserted that in LPA No. 1352 of 2012 titled as Devender Sachdeva and others vs. Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra and others, a Division Bench of this Court has again set aside the Instructions dated 16.03.2006 vide judgment dated 10.10.2012 (Annexure P -5). It has also been stated that the judgment passed by the Single Judge in CWP No. 17280 of 2011 has also been upheld in the said judgment. The State of Haryana has not preferred any further appeal against the said order and has rather accepted the same by issuing the Instructions dated 20.02.2013 (Annexure P -6). In the light of these submissions, counsel for the petitioner contends that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to file a detailed representation in support of the claim of the petitioner that she is entitled to promotion to the post of Matron by recasting the seniority list which would give the petitioner seniority over and above the private respondents and then grant the consequential benefits. The said representation shall be filed by the petitioner within a period of two weeks', which, he states, may be directed to be considered and decided by the Director General, Health Services, Haryana -respondent No. 2 within some specified time.

(2.) IN the light of the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner, if such a representation is made by the petitioner to the Director General, Health Services, Haryana -respondent No. 2 within a period of two weeks' from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent within a period of two months' from the date of submission of such representation.