KULJIT PAUL SINGH MAHI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment of mine, two petitions bearing Civil Writ Petition No.16073 of 2016 and Civil Writ Petition No.15572 of 2016 shall be disposed of as common question of law and facts are involved. However, for the sake of convenience, the facts are being derived from Civil Writ Petition No.16073 of 2016.

(2.) Petitioners have approached this Court by way of filing the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of seniority list dated 24.06.2016 (Annexure P-10), which has been prepared without adhering to the provisions under Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) (Class I) Rules, 1976 (here-in-after called as the Rules, 1976). A further prayer has also been made for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to forward the names of the eligible officers for selection and promotion to the Indian Administrative Service in accordance with the seniority fixed as per 'the Rules 1976' and the law laid down by Honourable the Apex Court in case Arvinder Singh Bains and others Vs. State of Punjab and others 2006(6) SCC 673.

(3.) As per case of the petitioners, they are senior most officers in the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) and are eligible for promotion to the Indian Administrative Services. They are aggrieved by action of the respondents in over ruling the seniority fixed as per the Rules, 1976 in the year 2007. The impugned seniority list dated 24.06.2016 has been prepared in complete contravention of the Rules, 1976. Petitioners are further aggrieved by the impugned seniority list which has been prepared in violation of law laid down by Honourable the Apex Court in Arvinder Singh Bains's case (supra). It is also their grievance that the petitioners are not being considered for promotion to the Indian Administrative Services as Service Rules, 1976 regarding 'rota and quota' principle have been interpreted.