NARESH KUMAR Vs. <FONT COLOR="#CC0000">VERSUS</FONT><P> STATE OF HARYANA, THROUGH SECRETARY TO GOVT. HARYANA, HOME DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute in these two appeals is regarding inter se seniority of persons working as constables in the Telecommunication Operators Cadre in the State of Haryana. The writ petitions filed by the appellants having been dismissed, they have filed these two Letters Patent Appeals. Counsel for the parties have referred to the facts as appearing on the record of L.P.A. No. 147 of 1994. These may be briefly noticed.

(2.) On February 20, 1984, the Director General of Police, Haryana, notified that "the Telecommunication Operators (Cadre) shall henceforth consist of the teleprinter operators, wireless operators and cryptography operators". Therefore, on August 2, 1988, the Superintendent of Police, Wireless Section, Haryana issued a circular informing the various authorities that "constables who are already working/trained on Wireless duty are to be absorbed in wireless section permanently. For this purpose an aptitude test will be conducted on 11th and 12th of this month." The officers were requested to forward "applications of all such willing constables who are matriculates..." Various persons applied. The aptitude test was conducted on August 12, 1988. Thereafter, the appointments were made vide orders dated August 19, 1988, September 7, 1988 and October 24, 1988. It is the claim of the appellants that after the appointments, the inter se seniority was determined on the basis of the date of absorption in the Telecommunication Operators Cadre. Even the promotions were made accordingly. This process continued till June 25, 1991 when certain persons who were allegedly junior to the appellants were promoted. The appellants filed Civil Writ Petition No. 1027 of 1991. This was disposed of at the stage of preliminary hearing vide order dated July 16, 1991. The petitioners therein were directed to make a representation to the competent authority viz the S.P. who was to decide it by passing a speaking order within three months. The appellants made the representation. It was rejected vide order dated November 19, 1991. A copy of the order is at Annexure P.6. Aggrieved by the order of rejection, the appellants approached this Court through C.W.P. No. 3678 of 1992. Similarly, 32 persons who are appellants in L.P.A. No. 25 of 1994 had filed C.W.P. No. 10253 of 1991. This petition was directed against the order dated June 25, 1991 by which the department had made promotion of various constables to the posts of Head Constables. Both the writ petitions having been dismissed by the learned Single Judge, the writ petitioners have filed the two Letters Patent Appeals.

(3.) On behalf of the appellants, it has been contended by Mr. P.S. Patwalia that the Telecommunication Operators Cadre is a totally new cadre. It is independent of the general police. The seniority of the persons working in this cadre has to be determined on the basis of the date of joining. Learned counsel emphasised that on absorption in the Telecommunication cadre, each one of the incumbents was given a new constabulary number and there was a complete snapping of ties with the past service. That being so, the seniority had to be determined only on the basis of the date of absorption in the new cadre. Mr. Patwalia also referred to the report, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure P.4, according to which the posts of the Telecommunication cadre had to be filled up by direct recruitment. On the basis thereof, it was contended that everyone having been directly recruited, the years of service put in by different persons in the parent cadre were of no consequence.