HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is the action of the department in denying the petitioner the benefit of service rendered by him in the consolidation Department for the purpose of fixation of seniority in the Transport Department illegal and violative of the Rules This is the short question that arises for consideration in this writ petition. A few facts may be briefly noticed.

(2.) The petitioner was selected by the Subordinate Service Selection Board, Punjab, for appointment as a Clerk. His name was forwarded by the Selection Board and he was appointed as a Clerk in the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Gurdaspur. The petitioner had joined service on October 22, 1959. In the year 1960, he was transferred to the Department of Consolidation of Holdings. The petitioners alleges that the Department of Consolidation was a branch of the Revenue Department and that the transfer had been made as the consolidation proceedings were being carried out in the State. He continued working as a Clerk in the Consolidation Department till the year 1971 when a decision to wind up the department was taken. Thereupon, vide order dated July 28, 1971 the petitioner was "appointed" as a Clerk in the Punjab Roadways. He joined on August 5, 1971. After having joined the Transport Department, the petitioner claimed the benefit of the service rendered by him in the Revenue and the Consolidation Departments for the purpose of determination of his seniority. The petitioner averred that this representations were rejected vide order dated September 14, 1995. A copy of this order has been produced as Annexure P-16 with the writ petition. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. He alleges that the action of the Government in denying him the benefit of the service rendered by him in the Revenue and Consolidation Departments towards the fixation of his seniority in the Transport Department is violative of the instructions issued by the Government and contrary to the Rule laid down by the Full Bench of this court in Kartar Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and other, A.I.R. 1990 Punjab and Haryana 1. The petitioner, consequently, prays that the order dated September 14, 1995 be quashed and that the respondents be directed to determine his seniority on the hypothesis that he had joined service in the Transport Department on October 22, 1959. He also prays for the grant of consequential benefits.

(3.) A written statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents by the Director, State Transport, Punjab. A preliminary objection that the petition has been filed after a lapse of 25 years has been raised. On merits, it has been pointed out that the petitioner was given a fresh appointment as a Clerk in the Transport Department. Consequently, the benefit of seniority on the basis of the service rendered in the Consolidation Department was not admissible. On representations having been received the matter was referred to the Chief Secretary. The Secretary, Subordinate Services Selection Board had advised that the seniority of the employees had to be determined by the department which was competent to resolve the issue. The respondents maintain that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of the service in the Consolidation Department under the Rules. Consequently, his claim was rightly rejected.