MAM CHAND GUPTA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner joined as Junior Engineer on regular basis with effect from 14.6.1971 and while in service, obtained AMIE Degree (Mechanical Engineering) in Nov. 1973, After obtaining the requisite qualification, the petitioner claimed himself to be eligible to be promoted to the post of Sub Divisional Engineer/Assistant Engineer, Class II. The said claim is based on Rule 6 of Punjab Service of Engineers Class II (PWD Building and Roads Branch) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the 1965 Rules). For ready reference, the above said rule being relied upon by the petitioner is reproduced as under:-

(2.) The petitioner stakes his claim at the vacancy which arose at serial No. 24 in the lot of 40 vacancies. The said roster point as per the petitioner fell to the share of source No. 4 as defined under Rule 6 of the 1965 Rules. The petitioner since his appointment had acquired experience of mere than 41/2 years but definitely less than five years as required under the rules. As per the petitioner, he would become eligible, if the condition of five years is relaxed. So far as respondent No. 3 is concerned, he was eligible under the same source as he was holding the Bachelor of Engineering Degree and in his case, only two years service experience was required. The Screening Committee as envisaged under Rule 9 of the 1965 Rules was constituted and its meeting was held in March, 1976. As per the petitioner, two persons were considered, i.e., petitioner and respondent No. 3 and the Screening Committee found the petitioner suitable by the relaxation of condition of five years service experience in favour of the petitioner. Thus, vide order dated 3.6.1976, the petitioner was promoted as Sub Divisional Engineer (Mechanical) on ad hoc basis for a period of six months subject to the availability of posts and in anticipation of the approval of the Haryana Public Service Commission. The petitioner joined the promotional post with effect from 31.8.1976 and by the that time, the petitioner had completed requisite experience of five years service as provided under the 1965 Rules. Copy of the promotion order dated 3.6.1976 is annexed as Annexure P-2.

(3.) The petitioner all of a sudden was reverted to the post of Junior Engineer vide order dated 27.2.1978 without assigning any reason. The petitioner represented against the same and the representation was accepted and the petitioner was reinstated vide order dated 20.12.1978 with effect from the date of joining on the promotional post, i.e. 31.8.1976. The said order dated 20.12.1978 is annexed as Annexure P-3. The petitioner was under the confirmed impression that respondent No. 3 had not been selected in competition with the petitioner. The respondent No. 3 had never raised any noise vis-a-vis promotion of the petitioner. The petitioner was confirmed in Class II Service with effect from 14.11.1987 vide order dated 8.2.1989. However, respondent No. 3 was promoted on ad hoc basis for a period of six months vide order dated 21.12.1976 but was subsequently reverted vide order dated 15.5.1989. In the meanwhile, promotions were made against roster point No. 32 and one Shri J.K. Jain was promoted with effect from 27.7.1981. However, as per the petitioner, the case of respondent No. 3 was duly considered by the Screening Committee at that point of time as well but respondent No. 3 was not promoted. Against the vacancy at reserved point No. 40, which had again fallen to the share of AMIE quota i.e., source No. 4 as per the 1965 Rules, one Shri Radhey Shayam Aggarwal was promoted against the said vacancy with effect from 7.12.1989 and as per the petitioner, respondent No. 3 was again considered for promotion against the said vacancy but was not found fit and instead Shri Radhey Shayam Aggarwal was promoted.