BALBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short issue raised in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is: whether promotion of Respondent No. 3 to the post of Superintendent Grade II from the post of Sr. Scale Stenographer, - -vide order dated 2nd June. 1994 was in accordance with Punjab Civil Services (Promotion of Stenographers and Stenotypists) Rules, 1961 (for brevity 'the Rules').

(2.) BRIEF facts necessary for disposal of the controversy raised are that Petitioner No. 1 was appointed as Clerk on 7th August, 1964 whereas Petitioner No. 2 has joined as such on 14th May, 1964. They were further promoted as Assistant on 20th November, 1971 and 13th September, 1971 respectively. Thereafter, Petitioner No. 2 was promoted as Superintendent Grade II on 2nd June, 1994 (P.3).

(3.) THE stand of the official Respondents in their written statement is that the Respondent No. 3 was not required to pass the test as he was already working as Senior Scale Stenographer with effect from 9th June, 1971 whereas Assistant Grade Examination Rules, 1984 came into force with effect from 12th April, 1984 (for brevity Assistant Grade Rules). It has been pointed out that Respondent No. 3 was given the work of an Assistant on 12th June, 1980 and he worked as an Assistant alongwith his work of stenographer for more than two years from 12th June, 1980 to 17th November, 1982. It is claimed that neither the Assistant Grade Examination Rules had come into force nor any such test was held. For the purpose of further promotion from clerical side a list of eligible candidates is prepared which includes the names of Assistant, Stenographer and Sr. Scale Stenographer. In para 5 of the written statement it has been claimed that inter se seniority list of Ministerial Establishment of department of Agriculture Punjab as on 1st September, 1979 was published and circulated, which was drawn on the basis of date of continuous appointment as Assistant as well as Stenographer. According to the averments made in para 5, Respondent No. 3 was promoted as Superintendent Grade II according to inter se seniority as Assistant vis -a -vis Senior Scale Stenographers which is determined for further promotion from the date of their continuous appointment as provided in Rule 3(2) of the Rules. The aforesaid seniority was never challenged by the Petitioners where Respondent No. 3 on the basis of continuous appointment has been shown senior to them.