RAM KUMAR RAO Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is admittedly senior than respondent No. 3 has prayed for the issuance of appropriate directions for quashing the order (Annexure P/2) dated 29.7.1994 by which the said respondent was promoted as Chief Stamp Auditor in supersession of his claim. He has further prayed for the issuance of direction to the respondents to promote him as Chief Stamp Auditor w.e.f. the date when respondent No. 3 was promoted. The petitioner is stated to have joined the service as Clerk on 14.1.1970 under official respondents and was promoted as Assistant on 3.8.1976. He was posted as Stamp Auditor on 11.2.1988 in the office of Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Haryana, Chandigarh. The post of Assistant is stated to be equivalent to the post of Stamp Auditor. The next higher promotion from the post of Stamp Auditor is that of Chief Stamp Auditor. The parties are stated to be governed by the statutory rules known was Haryana Financial Commissioner's Office (Group B) Service Rules, 1986 (for short the Rules). It is contended that respondent No. 3 was promoted in violation of the service rules applicable in the case.

(2.) In the reply filed on behalf of the respondents the seniority of the petitioner was not disputed but it was submitted that after examining the record of three senior-most Stamp Auditors order of promotion of respondent No. 3 was passed who was stated to have possessed better service record than the petitioner. Feeling that the record of respondent No. 3 was higher in merit than the petitioner, he was promoted by ignoring the claim of the petitioner. The order is claimed to be legal, valid and according to law.

(3.) Rule 9 of the Rules deals with the method of recruitment and provides:-