SUNDERJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed as a Sectional Officer in the PWD (Irrigation Branch) on May 24, 1958. In November, 1973 he qualified the departmental professional and revenue examinations. In May 1979, he also passed Parts A & B of the AMIE. On December 31, 1980 the petitioner was promoted as a Sub Divisional Engineer.

(2.) The petitioner alleges that till the year 1979, the Department was considering the claims of persons for promotion to the Class-II Service under the provisions of the Punjab Service of Engineers Class-II Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1941, in accordance with the seniority in the Class-III service. Even though the petitioner had qualified the departmental examinations so as to make him eligible for promotion to the Class-II Service earlier than his seniors, his name was not considered because the Department took a view that the claims have to be considered in strict order of seniority. In the year 1980 after the petitioner had qualified the AMIE examination in May, 1979, the Department took an exactly opposite view and decided that the inter se claim for promotion shall be considered in the order in which the candidates had qualified the AMIE examination. As a result, various persons, who were junior to the petitioner but had qualified the AMIE examination earlier than him were considered before him and promoted on January 10, 1980. The petitioner's name was considered subsequently and was promoted on December 31, 1980. The result was that the petitioner became junior to the persons who had been promoted earlier. Aggrieved by this action, the petitioner approached the Civil Court through a suit. The Court examined the matter. The Sub Judge First Class, Chandigarh vide judgment and decree dated October 31, 1985 declared that the "plaintiff is senior to defendants No. 3 to 15 and that in the promotion order No....dated 29.12.1980 and in the Gradation and Distribution List of Officers of the Irrigation Branch of the Punjab P.W.D. as corrected upto Ist January, 1981 as also in all other documents already issued or to be issued hereafter in which seniority of Sub Divisional Officers is reflected, his name should appear above the names of these defendants, with entitlement to all consequential benefits on the basis of such seniority with costs......" By order dated March 2, 1987 (copy at Annexure P.1 with the writ petition), the petitioner was placed at Sr. No. 68 in the list of PSE Class-II. Various persons, including Respondent Nos. 3 to 27, some of whom were even defendants in the civil suit, were shown senior to him. The petitioner prays that the order dated March 2, 1987, in so far as it shows him as junior to respondent Nos. 3 to 27, including some of whom were defendants in the civil suit, be quashed. He further prays that he be declared senior to Respondent No. 3 and granted all such reliefs as have been given to the respondents.

(3.) A written statement has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 only. Respondent Nos. 3 to 27 have not filed the reply. In this written statement, it has been, inter-alia, averred that the persons, who had qualified the AMIE examination, have been given ante-dated promotions vide order dated March 2, 1987 keeping in view of the date of their eligibility and the availability of vacancies. A copy of this order has been produced as Annexure R.1. The petitioner's name in this document has been placed at Sr. No. 68. The respondents aver that "it will be observed that the petitioner has been given ante-dated promotion w.e.f. 10.1.1980, his previous actual date of promotion is 30.12.1980 and it is apparent that he has been given very first post of vacancy which became available for promotion for AMIE qualified Junior Engineers after his becoming eligible for promotion in 5/1979. It is further stated that these orders have been issued as in the written statement of CWP No. 494 of 1980 an affidavit was filed by the Department that these AMIE qualified persons will be considered for promotion from the dates they have been denied wrongly on account of Para 11.4 of the Manual of Administration." The respondents state that with the issue of this order "the grievances of the petitioner are fully met with as he cannot claim the promotion earlier to the eligibility in May, 1979, the date of his qualifying AMIE." On this basis the respondents maintain that the writ petition has been rendered infructuous.