DEVI RAM BHAGTA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Material facts necessary for adjudication of this petition are that the petitioner has assailed the promotion of private respondents to the post of Naib Tehsildar from the feeder category of Kanungo made as per office order dated 19th March, 1996 (Annexure A-1).

(2.) Mr. Trilok Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the seniority of the cadre of Kanungo is to be reckoned from the date the candidates are accepted as Kanungo. Mr. P. M. Negi, learned Deputy Advocate General has strenuously argued that the seniority of the cadre of Kanungo is to be determined when the 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. candidate is appointed substantively as per Rule 12 of the Himachal Pradesh Kanungo Service Rules, 1951.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully.