ARVINDER SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioner Arvinder Singh for issuance of an appropriate writ, direction or order, especially in the nature of certiorari, quashing/setting aside the order dated 03.12.2009 passed by learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') for quashing the action of the respondents in contravention of Memorandum dated 16.06.2006, for quashing the letters dated 19.05.2007 (Annexure P -11 before the Tribunal), dated 24.08.2007 (Annexure P -12 before the Tribunal), dated 11.09.2007 (Annexure P -14 before the Tribunal), dated 12.09.2007 (Annexure P -15 before the Tribunal) and dated 20.09.2007 (Annexure P -17 before the Tribunal) and for issuance of the appropriate writ, direction or order especially in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to make the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Scientific/Technical Officer 'C in accordance with the promotion process stipulated in Memorandum dated 16.06.2006 and accordingly, promote the petitioner to the aforesaid post with all the consequential benefits.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as Coordinator vide letter dated 21.06.1985 by respondent No. 2 to perform the technical functions like handling Electric Data Processing (EDP)/Information Technology (IT) Operations. He was promoted as Technical Assistant -II w.e.f. 01.01.1989, then as Technical Assistant -III w.e.f. 01.01.1992 and then as Technical Assistant -IV w.e.f. 01.01.1995. He was further promoted as Assistant Officer in 'E' Grade w.e.f. 01.07.2000 after taking into account his performance. Prior to his entry into service, the petitioner completed a computer course in COBOL programming and was awarded the certificate to that effect. With effect from 01.09.2006 the Semi Conductor Complex Limited was registered as a Society under the Societies Registration Act, 1856. The existing employees were to be appointed against the equivalent post by respondent No. 2. They were required to submit the 'Declaration of Election' before 30.06.2006. The petitioner submitted his 'Declaration of Election' dated 26.06.2006 to continue in service with respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 2 vide order dated 01.09.2006 designated the post of 'Assistant Officer E -I' as Scientific/Technical Assistant -'C. According to Memorandum dated 16.06.2006, the next promotional post is Scientific/Technical Officer 'C from amongst Scientific/Technical Assistant 'C having five years experience with the promotion process comprising of Screening, Consideration of Confidential Record and Interview. The petitioner was fully eligible for the promotion to the post of Scientific/Technical Officer 'C as he was promoted as Assistant Officer E -1 Grade w.e.f. 01.07.2000 and has almost 10 years of service to his credit against the minimum requirement of 5 years. Respondent No. 2 issued the letter dated 19.5.2007 (Annexure P -11 before the Tribunal) to the effect that a written test would be held for promotion to the post in question. The syllabus of written test would be equivalent to ITI Certificate/Diploma. The said test was without any jurisdiction and contrary to the Memorandum of the Society. The said letter was followed by another letter dated 24.08.2007. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 03.09.2007 (Annexure P -13 before the Tribunal) protesting the holding of the written test and specifically stated that the same was not applicable to the petitioner. Respondent No. 2 has exempted certain colleagues of the petitioner selectively from appearing in the written test. Only the petitioner and one more Scientific/Technical Assistant 'C have been directed to appear for the written test. Petitioner submitted the representation dated 17.09.2007. There was no response to the said representation. The petitioner filed CWP No. 15236 of 2007, which was transferred to the learned Tribunal and was registered as T.A. No. 5/CH/2009. It is further pleaded that two employees namely Vivek Singh Dadwal and Divya Behl have also done their Masters in Economics like the petitioner. They were exempted from written test and Vivek Dadwal was promoted to the post of Scientific/Technical Officer 'E'. The learned Tribunal dismissed the claim of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 03.12.2009. The said order has been challenged by the petitioner on the grounds that the action of the respondents was contrary to the Memorandum dated 16.06.2006. The insistence of the petitioner to undergo the written test for promotion to the post of Scientific/Technical Officer 'C was violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and the same is illegal. The respondents have tailor -made criteria to the sole disadvantage of the petitioner. The Tribunal has wrongly equated the 'Screening' with the written test, whereas screening is completely different from the written tests. The service condition of the petitioner cannot be changed retrospectively to his detriment. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. P.S. Bajwa Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vivek Singla, Advocate, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 and have meticulously gone through the paper -book.