LAWS(P&H)-2016-1-92

SUBHASH MAHAJAN Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

Decided On January 22, 2016
Subhash Mahajan Appellant
V/S
State of Punjab and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure P10) whereby the work of the cadre post of Chief Engineer, Punjab Mandi Board, has been given to the ex -cadre junior of the petitioner, without considering the case of the petitioner. Further prayer has been made to promote the petitioner to the cadre post, against the vacant cadre post of Chief Engineer w.e.f. 01.09.2015 and grant all consequential benefits.

(2.) The petitioner's grouse is that he is the senior -most Superintending Engineer and he has been denied the right of consideration of promotion against the vacancy which arose on 31.08.2015, on the retirement of one Shri R.P. Bhatti, who retired as Chief Engineer (North). It is the case of the petitioner that on account of the said retirement, he was entitled for consideration for promotion as Chief Engineer and the order has been passed on 24.09.2015, denying him the said right. It is submitted that his junior, respondent No. 5, could not be given the said charge. Reliance is placed upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Shingara Chand & others Vs. Punjab Water Supply & Sewerage Board & others : 2000 (2) RSJ 317 and CWP No. 13638 of 2008 titled Baldev Raj Vs. Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board & another, decided on 24.09.2008, to submit that even otherwise, the petitioner was entitled to be given the Current Duty Charge, being the senior -most.

(3.) The defence of the respondent -Board is, on one hand, that the petitioner could not be considered for the post of Chief Engineer, when his extension of service from 58 years to 60 years, is under cloud. It is not disputed that the petitioner was granted extension in service, from 58 years to 60 years, on account of his handicap, vide order dated 22/23.06.2015 (Annexure P5). The Board, in its reply, has also admitted that though a doubt had been raised regarding his disability certificate, but now, in view of the report of the PGIMER, the extension in service was sustained vide letter dated 10.12.2015.