PRITAM SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 3.1.1991 passed by the learned Courts below vide which the suit filed by the plaintiff/appellant for declaration that he is entitled to be promoted to the post of Sub Divisional Clerk and further as Accounts Clerk from the dates junior to him shown at serial No. 153 to 167 of Annexure IV and seniority list of Accounts Clerks circulated vide order No. 579/6 NGE -11/2/47/854/78 dated 14.1.1985 were promoted as Sub Divisional Clerks and Accounts Clerks, respectively, with consequential relief of mandatory injunction directing the defendant/respondent to grant scale of Accounts Clerk i.e. Rs. 570 -1080 to the plaintiff w.e.f. the date juniors to him shown at serial No. 153 to 176 of Annexure IV in the seniority list dated 14.1.1985 were promoted as Accounts Clerks with consequential benefit, stands dismissed.

(2.) THE plaintiff brought a suit on the pleadings that he was appointed as Clerk on 6.5.1965. Thereafter, he was transferred to Shah Nahar Circle Talwara and promoted as Sub Divisional Clerk w.e.f. 6.3.1978 and was transferred to Kandi Circle Hoshiarpur as Sub Divisional Clerk/Senior Clerk on 22.7.1983. It was pleaded that the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Works, Punjab, Chandigarh, circulated seniority list of Accounts Clerks of Punjab Public Works Department, Irrigation Branch, vide his office order dated 14.1.1985. From the said seniority list, the plaintiff/appellant came to know that the persons shown at serial Nos. 153 to 167, who were junior to him, had already been promoted as Accounts Clerks in the year 1983, whereas plaintiff/appellant was still working as Sub Divisional Clerk/Senior Clerk. Plaintiff/appellant made representation to the Chief Engineer, but without any tangible result.

(3.) THE written statement was filed, wherein preliminary objections were raised, that the suit was liable to be dismissed for want of notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, that the suit is not maintainable, the suit was bad for mis -joinder and non -joinder of necessary parties and no cause of action accrued to the plaintiff, thus, it was claimed, that the suit be dismissed.