J R VERMA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos.5889 of 2001 and 9340 of 2001, involving similar question of law and facts. For facility of reference, facts are being mentioned from CWP No.9340 of 2001.

(2.) By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has laid challenge to the order dated 16.2.2001 (Annexure P/14), vide which respondent No.4 was appointed as Secretary of respondent No.3. It is his primary grievance that respondent No.4 was appointed without following any procedure and her entry was made through the back door. It is further contention of the petitioner that he, being senior-most employee with respondent No.3, an experience hand, more suitable, his claim has wrongly been rejected. It has been prayed that appointment of respondent No.4 as Secretary of respondent No.3, be quashed and directions be issued to the respondents to consider case of the petitioner, along with other eligible candidates for the post in question.

(3.) Briefly, it is case of the petitioner that he is a post graduate and was appointed as a Clerk with respondent No.3 in the year 1973. He was asked to perform the duties of a stenographer and on account of that, a special pay of Rs.25/-per month was sanctioned in his favour, in the month of June 1979. He, after passing the competency test, was promoted as an 'Assistant' in the month of July 1987. Without getting regular promotion, he had been performing duties of Assistant Secretary between 1979 and 1999. The petitioner made a representation that keeping in view his experience and qualifications, he be promoted to the post of Assistant Secretary. His case was recommended by Shri Chander Bhan, IRS, who saw his work as an observer in Vidhan Sabha Elections. On 8.6.2000, post of Secretary had fallen vacant on account of death of Shri M.S.Bhalla. The petitioner again represented, staking his claim for the above said post. However, without taking note of his experience and qualifications, respondent No.4, who was only a fresh graduate, having no experience, was taken in as Secretary of respondent No.3, for a period of six months, on temporary/ ad hoc basis, on 20.6.2000. She was granted extension of six months more on 20.12.2000. On 8.12.2000, the petitioner again made a representation that his claim for promotion/ selection be considered for the post of Secretary. Without issuing any advertisement, inviting applications, also without considering claim of the petitioner and other eligible candidates, service of respondent No.4 was regularized on 16.2.2001 (Annexure P/14). Hence, this writ petition.