SURESH KUMAR Vs. REGISTRAR, REGIONAL ENGINEERING COLLEGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged assignment of seniority below respondent No. 2 by respondent No. 1.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that the petitioner appeared in the interview for Laboratory Attendants conducted by respondent No. 1 and was appointed by order dated 20.2.1996. Annexure P-1 is Office order dated 27.8.1998, confirming the petitioner and other employees. The petitioner has been shown at Sr. No. 15 in the list above respondent No. 2 who is at Sr. No. 16. The date of joining was shown as 22.2.1996 and that of respondent No. 2 as 24.2.1996. In the tentative seniority list Annexure P-2, again respondent No. 1 was placed at Sr. No. 2 below Shri Ramesh Chand and above the respondent who is at Sr. No. 3. In the final seniority list, Annexure P-3 which was circulated on 22.5.2000, petitioner was placed at Sr. No. 3 below respondent No. 2. Being aggrieved by this act on the part of the respondents, a detailed representation Annexure P-4 was filed by the petitioner stating therein that he had been downgraded. By communication Annexure P-5, the representation was rejected on the ground that respondent No. 2 was appointed against a reserved vacancy through direct recruitment and as a consequence, would rank senior above the petitioner. The letter states that respondent No. 2 has been placed above the petitioner, as the selection committee determined that he is higher in merit.

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