PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition, the Petitioner has prayed that he be treated to be promoted on ad - hoc basis as Assistant Engineer w.e.f. 13.4.1999 when his juniors were promoted as Assistant Engineer on ad -hoc basis.

(2.) THERE is no denial of the fact that vide order Annexure A -4/A a number of persons were promoted as Assistant Engineers, out of whom some, such as, Prithvi Singh Katoch, Des Raj Bhardwaj, J.K. Gupta, etc. were admittedly juniors to the Petitioner. The stand of the Respondents appears to be that even while making ad -hoc promotion the relative merit of the employees was considered and a DPC held. The promotions were made on the basis of merit and the Petitioner was superseded. It is also apparent from the record that the Petitioner made representation and his representation was accepted and he was granted ad -hoc promotion w.e. f. 10.3.2000.

(3.) SECOND circular in this regard is dated 23.4.1985, which reads as follows: