SHAKTI SINGH Vs. SLATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant was working as a Workshop Superintendent in Automobile Engineering in the Deptt. of Technical Education and Industrial Training and was promoted against the post of Head of Department in the same trade on officiating basis vide orders dated December 9, 1983 contained in Annexure -A/2 against the post temporarily vacated by Shri S.C. Paul when his services were placed at the disposal of Himachal Road Transport Corporation. This order clearly mentioned that this promotion was purely temporary and would not confer any right whatsoever upon the applicant towards seniority or continuance as such. The services of Shri S.C. Paul had been placed at the disposal of Himachal Road Transport Corporation for a period of two years. The applicant joined the post of Head of Department on December 16, 1983. Shri S.C. Paul never returned to his parent Deptt. and continued with Himachal Road Transport Corporation and was ultimately absorbed there vide notification dated July 20, 1989 as shown in Annexure -A/8. The applicant continued to function as Head of Department against this post and in the meanwhile on the recommendations of Departmental Promotion Committee fresh notification was issued on May 9, 1988 ordering that the applicant shall stand promoted as Head of Department in Automobile Engineering from the date he took over the charge of the said post i.e. December 16, 1983 vide Annexure -A/ 9. This notification was issued in partial modification of notification dated December 9, 1983. The applicant was further promoted in the scale of Rs. 4125 -125 -5000 -150 -5600 (same as the grade of Principal Polytechnic) for a period of six months or till the post were filled on regular basis purely on adhoc basis vide notification dated May 26, 1992 contained in Annexure -A/12. However, respondent No. 1 issued another notification dated May 9, 1995 contained in Annexure -A/17 on the recommendations of review Departmental Promotion Committee and by this notification the notification dated December 9, 1983 was modified and notification dated May 9, 1988 superseded; the applicants promotion as Head of the Department of Automobile was made effective from May 9, 1988 i.e. the benefit given to the applicant by notification dated May 9, 1988 for working on the post of Head of Department Automobile Engineering w.e.f. December 16, 1983 had been withdrawn and substituted from May 9, 1988. It is against this notification dated May 9, 1995 Annexure -A/17 that the present application has been filed. The case of the applicant is that by change of date of his promotion from December 16, 1983 to May 9, 1988, he lost seniority on the post of Head of Department and as a result respondents 2 to 4 became senior to him or have been shown as senior to him and in consequence he has been shown as juniormost in further promotion made to the post of Principals Polytechnic on regular basis vide notification dated May 25, 1995 contained in Annexure -A/18. It has been prayed that the impugned notification contained in Annexure -A/17 may be quashed and set aside and the date of regular promotion of the applicant as Head of Department Auto be restored to December 16, 1983. It has also been prayed that Annexure -A/18 may be quashed and set aside qua the applicant and respondents 2 to 4 and respondent No. 1 may be directed to convene a review Departmental Promotion Committee for considering the claim of the applicant for promotion as Principal from due date in accordance with law with all consequential benefits. In sub para 22 of Para 6 of the application it has been mentioned that the impugned notification contained in Annexure -A/17 was issued without affording any opportunity of being heard to the applicant; this notification was issued after six years of his regular promotion and after more than three years of his confirmation as Head of the Department. That such a belated action on the part of respondent No. 1 is violative of the principles of natural justice as it unsettled the settled position.

(2.) Respondent No. 3 in his reply has resisted the claim of the applicant on various grounds and has mentioned that promotion of the applicant against temporary vacancy only as stop -gap arrangement could have not given him seniority over and above those who were promoted and appointed on regular basis. It has further been claimed that the applicant though discharging the duties of Head of the Department against the post temporarily vacated by Shri S.C. paul could not have been given regular promotion to the said post; such regular promotion was given to him only vide notification dated May 9, 1995 when the review Departmental Promotion Committee modified and superseded the earlier order of promotion granting promotion to the applicant as Head of the Department w.e.f. May 9, 1988.

(3.) Respondent No. 2 has also resisted the application almost on the same grounds. It has also been mentioned by him that promotion of respondent No. 2 as Head of the Department in Mechanical Engineering was on regular basis with immediate effect; as such the seniority of respondent No. 2 as Head of the Department was to reckon from the date of notification i.e. December 12, 1983 as shown in Annexure -A/3.