PREM CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are working as Canal Patwaris. They complain that respondent Nos. 3 to 7, who are junior to them, have been promoted as Assistant Revenue Clerks without considering their claim. A copy of the order dated July 4, 1991 by which respondent Nos. 3 to 7 were promoted, has been produced as Annexure P-3 with the writ petition. The petitioners pray that this order be quashed and the respondents be directed to consider their claim for promotion with effect from the date the persons junior to them were promoted.

(2.) In the written statement filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, it has been inter alia stated that the appointment to the posts of Assistant Revenue Clerks is governed by the rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution in the year 1956. According to these rules, a person should be not more than 35 years of age for appointment to the post of Assistant Revenue Clerk. This age limit had been relaxed by the Chief Engineer upto 40 years. The petitioners were "found ineligible in view of the fact that they had crossed the prescribed age-limit of 35 years as well as the relaxed age upto 40 years". It has been further stated that respondent No. 3 is senior to the petitioners and was granted age relaxation vide Chief Engineer/Drainage letter No. 26/6NGE II/90 dated 1.1.91". A copy of this letter has been produced as Annexure R-7. Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 belong to categories for which reservation had been made in accordance with the instructions issued by the Govt. It has been further stated that the rules of 1956 were superseded by the 'Haryana Irrigation Department Revenue and Assistant Clerks (Group C)_ Service Rules, 1991'. The claim of various Patwaris was considered in accordance with the 1956 rules which were in force on the date of the occurrence of the vacancies. As the petitioners were ineligible, they were not promoted. On these premises, the respondents claim that the writ petition should be dismissed.

(3.) A separate written statement has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 5. Besides raising certain preliminary objections which have not been pressed, it has been stated that the appointment to the posts of Assistant Revenue Clerks has to be made in accordance with the provisions of 1956 rules. Under these rules, no person has a right to be appointed merely on the basis of seniority. The appointment has to be made by selection. With regard to respondent No. 3 it has been pointed out that he was given benefit of military service vide order dated March 27, 1986. Thereafter, his seniority was refixed and he was declared senior to petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. It has been further pointed out that the Haryana Govt. has issued instructions for reservation of posts for members of Backward Classes and Scheduled Castes. Respondent No. 5 is a member of the Backward Class. His claim was considered along with that of the other eligible persons and he was duly selected and promoted out that the petitioners were ineligible as they wee more than 40 years of age.