LAWS(HPH)-2012-1-36

RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Decided On January 13, 2012
RAJESH KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MATERIAL facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondent -State has framed the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, under Article 309 of the Constitution of India for filling up the posts of Planning Officers vide notification dated 30.5.1998 and amended from time to time. According to the existing Recruitment and Promotion Rules, Annexure P -5, the post of Planning Officer is to be filled up 20% by direct recruitment, 5% by transfer, failing which by direct recruitment and 75% by promotion out of which 25% from the feeder category of Junior Engineers with 5 years of service and 50% from Senior Planning Draftsman with 5 years of service. Case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that the cadre strength of the Junior Engineers, which is also one of the feeder categories for promotion to the Post of Planning Officer, is 29 and the cadre strength of the Senior Planning Draftsman, which is also feeder category for promotion to the post of Planning Officer, is 13. The respondent -Department has already proposed the amendment in the Recruitment and Promotion Rules as per letter dated 2.2.2011 whereby it has been proposed that the ratio of promotion as far as Junior Engineers is concerned will be increased from 25% to 35% to the post of Planning Officer and the ratio of Senior Planning Draftsman will be reduced from 50% to 35%. Petitioners have also made representations for the redressal of their grievance, however, respondent -State has taken decision that existing vacancies are to be filled up on the basis of existing Recruitment and Promotion Rules.

(2.) MS . Jyotsna Rewal Dua has strenuously argued that the writ of mandamus be issued to the respondents -State to increase the quota of feeder category of Junior Engineers for promotion to the post of Planning Officer from existing 25% to 35% in terms of the proposed amendment as per letter dated 2.2.2011.

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