NARESH KUMAR Vs. HPSEB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment since identical questions of law and facts are involved.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that both the Petitioners were substantially holding the post of Telephone (Mechanic). Both the Petitioners were promoted as Foremen purely on acting basis and also as a stop gap arrangement in the year 1993. It is also not disputed that though they were promoted as Foremen they were promoted against the posts meant for Junior Engineer (Telephone).

(3.) ON 22.5.2006, the Petitioners who were holding the charge of Foreman on acting basis were reverted to the substantial post of Telephone (Mechanic). By means of these petitions they have challenged their reversion orders.