PRITTAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was appointed as Lineman (Work-charge) on 5th March, 1973. His precise case is that two workmen, namely, Parkash and Darshan Singh have been promoted to the post of Fitter (Work-charge) vide letter dated 29th January, 1987. His further case is that the Executive Engineer has recommended the case of the petitioner to the Superintending Engineer for promotion from Lineman (Work-charge) to Fitter (Work-charge) on 15.3.1995. The case of the respondent-State, in nutshell, is that only two posts of Fitter (Work-charge) were available.

(2.) Mr. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the action of the respondents of not promoting the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, thus violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Mr. Rajinder Dogra, learned Additional Advocate General has argued that in absence of posts, the petitioner could not be promoted.

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