VED PARKASH Vs. PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners are aggrieved of the order dated 7th July, 2006 passed by Respondent No. 1, whereby Respondents No. 2 to 9, who according to the Petitioners were junior to them, had been promoted to the post of Superintendent (Grade -I) in the Subordinate Judicial Courts of Haryana and also that the promotion of the Respondents No. 2 to 9 was made in violation of Rule 7 of the Haryana Subordinate Courts Establishment (Recruitment and General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997. The Petitioners, thus, sought issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order of promotion.

(2.) IN the writ petition, it was pleaded that the service conditions of ministerial staff in subordinate Courts in Haryana are governed by Haryana Subordinate Courts Establishment (Recruitment and General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') as per which the ministerial staff is divided into two branches. In first branch, the initial appointments are made to the post of Clerk, who are later on promoted to the post of Assistant and thereafter as Superintendent Grade -II. Further that, for promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade -II, one should have an experience of at least three years on the post of Assistant and the promotion is governed by the principle of seniority -cum -merit. The other branch consists of Steno -typists, who are promoted to the post of Stenographers/Judgment Writers (Junior Grade) and then to the post of judgment Writers (Senior Grade). For promotion to the post of judgment Writer (Senior Grade), one should have the experience of at least three years on the post of Stenographer/Judgment Writer (Junior Grade) and such promotions are again based on seniority -cum -merit. Rule 7(i) provided the mode of appointment and qualifications to the post of Superintendent. This post has to be filled up by the High Court by selection from amongst graduate Superintendents Grade -II, Judgment Writers (Senior Grade), Assistants, Judgment Writers (Junior Grade) and Stenographers, who were not below 40 years of age as on the date on which the applications are invited and preference is to be given to law graduates.

(3.) IN its written statement, Respondent No. 1 stated that the Petitioners participated in the selection process and as they have not been found suitable for promotion, therefore, they are estopped in law from challenging the selection of Respondents No. 2 to 9. It was also stated that, - -vide instructions dated 9th May, 1985 issued by the State of Haryana, only such official or officials, who had obtained at least 70% or more reports of "good" or better categories during the last ten years could be considered eligible for promotion to the higher posts. However, the High Court had framed its own rules for promotion to the ministerial staff in the subordinate Courts in Haryana. Therefore, the service conditions were governed by the High Court Rules, while the instructions issued by the State of Haryana had not been adopted. Even otherwise, the instructions isssued by the State of Haryana were only applicable for the purposes of promotion, whereas the appointments of Superintendents in the Subordinate Courts is by way of selection as per the decision taken by a Full Court of the High Court. The applications were invited through respective District and Session Judges in the State of Haryana of eligible candidates for the appointment as Superintendents. After the applications were received, the matter was placed before the Committee of Hon'ble Judges duly constituted by Hon'ble the Chief Justice. After considering the service records of the candidates, the Committee recommended the names of the candidates for bringing them on the select -list and those names were approved by Hon'ble Judges in the Full Court meeting held on 25th May, 2006. Accordingly, select -list was prepared and appointments were made from the same. It was denied that any communication, whatsoever, was to be sent to the Petitioners. On the basis of the applications submitted by all eligible persons as well as on the basis of the service record, as list of 62 candidates, who had applied was prepared. The list contained the details regarding the date of entry into service, the qualifications and precis of Annual Confidential Reports/complaints. After the first list, another list of candidates, who were having qualification of LL.B. was prepared. After the aforesaid exercise, both the lists, along with entire service record of all the candidates, was put up before the Committee of Hon'ble Judges constituted by the Hon'ble Chief Justice. The Committee considered all the eligible candidates in view of the parameters laid down in the Rules and also examined their Annual Confidential Reports. On the basis of their records as well as the academic qualifications, Respondents No. 2 to 9 were recommended in trie order of merit for promotion to the post of Superintendent to the District and Sessions Judges. Being conscious of the fact regarding further posts of Superintendents, which were likely to all vacant in the near future, the Committee also kept three more candidates in the select -list for absorption within the next two years. Since the Petitioners were less meritorious and less qualified than the selected candidates, hence they had been rightly ousted by Respondents No. 2 to 9. Accordingly, it was prayed that the writ petition be dismissed.