DR.SATISH RATHORE Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Articles 226/ 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred against the order dated 31.8.2000 of the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal dismissing the Original Application No. 89/87 of the petitioner for promotion to the post of H.P.H.S. Grade -I from the post of H.P.H.S. Grade -II in the State Health Services.

(2.) The petitioners case is that he was appointed as Medical Officer/ General Duty Officer Grade -II (GDO -II) on ad hoc basis in the Himachal Health Services and he joined his duties as such on 12.8.1978. In May, 1982 the services of the petitioner were regularized by the State Government after he successfully qualified the examination conducted by the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission.

(3.) The State Government framed Rules known as Himachal Pradesh Departmental Examinations Rules, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "Examinations Rules, 1976") under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Rule 21 relevant for the purpose of deciding the controversy reads as under: "21. Failure to pass the Departmental Examination. -If a member of the service fails to pass the departmental examination within his probation period or within 2 years of the notification of these rules, whichever is later, he shall not be eligible to - (i) cross the efficiency bar next due; (ii) confirmation in the service; and (iii) promotion to the next higher post: Provided that if a member of the service becomes otherwise eligible for promotion, within the period mentioned above, he shall be considered for promotion and if otherwise found fit shall be provisionally promoted subject to his passing the departmental examination. He may be reverted if he fails to pass the same: Provided further that if there are specific rules governing the conditions of service of a category or a class of officers, the provisions contained in such service rules relating to the effect of failure to pass the departmental examination shall prevail."