N K SHARMA DISTRICT MANAGER PUNJAB AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION Vs. PUNJAB AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, petitioners are seeking mandate directing respondent No. 1 to count the period of ad-hoc/officiating service rendered by the petitioners towards their seniority. They are also seeking a further direction for quashing the final seniority list circulated by respondent No. 1 on 14. 11. 1990 and to place the petitioners above respondents No. 2 to 6.

(2.) AS per the case set up by the petitioners in the writ petition, petitioner No. 1 joined Punjab Agro Industries Corporation (for short the Corporation) on 12. 4. 1979 as an Apprentice Engineer. Vide order dated 29. 10. 1981, Petitioner No. 1 was promoted to the post of District Manager on ad-hoc basis. Petitioner No. 2 joined the Corporation as Chargeman Mechanical on 15. 9. 1970. Vide order dated 16. 8. 1983, petitioner No. 2 was made to officiate as District Manager which post he joined on 22/23. 8. 1983. Some posts of Area/district Managers were advertised and a Selection Committee was constituted to fill up those posts. Vide proceedings held on 21. 9. 1984, 28. 9. 1984 and 26. 10. 1984, the Selection Committee regularised the promotion of petitioner No. 1. Consequently, vide order dated 12. 11. 1984, petitioner No. 2 was regularised as District Manager. Further, according to the petitioners, a tentative seniority list was circulated by respondent No. 1 on 21. 11. 1989 inviting objections thereto. Both the petitioners duly submitted their objections. Vide order dated 14. 11. 1990, final seniority list was circulated in which the petitioners have not been given the benefit of ad-hoc service towards seniority. In the writ petition, the petitioners have prayed that they be given the benefit of ad-hoc service and they be placed above respondents No. 2 to 6 in the seniority list.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 1 has denied the assertion that at the time the petitioners were promoted on ad-hoc basis, the claim of all other candidates was considered. According to the respondents, petitioner No. 1 was appointed on selection by a Regular Selection Committee in 1984, who was interviewed alongwith other candidates and accordingly, after regular selection, his services were regularised with effect from 9. 11. 1984. As regards petitioner No. 2, respondent No. 1 has stated that he was appointed as Chargeman on temporary basis. Later on he was appointed as Assistant Manager, Workshop in the scale of Rs. 300 to Rs. 600 for a period of six months on temporary basis which period was further extended. Since the post, of Chargeman was abolished by the Board of Directors in the year 1979, petitioner No. 2 was allowed to continue as Assistant Manager, Workshop, otherwise his services would have been terminated. He was further given the charge of District Manager in his own pay scale which was lower than the scale of a District Manager and started looking after the work of District Manager with effect from 22. 8. 1983. Petitioner No. 2 applied for the post of Manager only on 209. 1984 in response to a departmental circular. His name was considered by the Selection Committee and be was appointed as Manager on 12. 11. 1984 and completed his probation on 11. 11. 1985. Respondents have further stated that petitioner No. 1 never worked as Manager before his selection.