HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD NOW HARYANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. ANIL KUMAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant/respondent No.1 seeks review of the order, dated 16.12.2016, vide which, we had disposed of the application moved by the Board/HPGCL, seeking clarification of our order dated 19.08.2014, whereby we had dismissed its appeal.

(2.) A brief narration of facts that have led the parties to the current position shall be expedient.

(3.) The applicant/respondent No.1 was appointed as Junior Engineer, pursuant to an order dated 15.11.1990, in the erstwhile Haryana State Electricity Board (now Haryana Power Generation Corporation Ltd.), on acquiring Bachelors degree in Engineering. Whereas, the private respondents No.2 to 4 in the writ petition as also in the LPA were appointed on 7.12.1990 and 22.08.1991, respectively. The applicant/respondent No.1 was posted in Thermal/Generation Project, whereas respondents No. 2 to 4 were assigned the field/general cadre. The next promotion from Junior Engineer was/is to the post of Assistant Engineer. The claim of the applicant/respondent No.1 as also the private respondents No.2 to 4, was to be considered under 12.5% quota for Junior Engineers, possessing a degree in BE/AMIE. And, vide orders dated 1.1.1993 and 3.3.1992, respondents No.2 to 4 were promoted as Assistant Engineer by the Board/HPGCL. The applicant/respondent No.1 assailed their promotion, vide CWP No.7803 of 1993 (Anil Kumar Vs. The Haryana State Electricity Board and others), for his grievance was, since he was placed higher in merit in the select list for appointment to the post of Junior Engineers, was senior in service, and had qualified the BE/AMIE earlier to respondents No.2 to 4, he ought to be promoted first. For, another petition i.e. CWP No.6557 of 1993 (Rajender Singh Redhu and others Vs. Haryana State Electricity Board and others), involving an identical issue was already pending, the petition filed by the applicant/respondent No.1 was ordered to be heard therewith. The common stand set out by the Board in both the petitions was that as the applicant/respondent No.1 was a member of generation cadre, and no vacancy of Assistant Engineer, in the quota of AMIE/BE, existed therein, he could not be considered for promotion. Whereas, on the contrary, vacancies of Assistant Engineers were available in the field cadre (general cadre), and thus, respondents No.2 to 4, who were working in the said cadre, were promoted. However, vide order and judgment, dated 29.07.1997, this Court allowed the petition filed by Rajender Singh Redhu and others and set aside the orders of promotion assailed therein. It was concluded that generation projects or general/field cadre were not two distinct or separate cadres. The cadre of Junior Engineers was one. Which is why, a Junior Engineer posted in the Thermal/Generation Project could be transferred to general cadre or vice versa. The decision rendered by the learned Single Judge in Rajender Singh Redhu and others was assailed by the Board/HPGCL vide Intra-Court appeal i.e. LPA No.657 of 1997. However, vide order and judgment dated 17.12.2004 that too was dismissed by the LPA Bench.