YASH PAL Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (ART, LANGUAGE & CULTURE) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein, is, aggrieved by the impugned order, of, 13.11.2013, whereunder, the contesting respondents, hence, promoted respondent No.5, to the promotional post, of, Junior Engineer. The grievance reared by the petitioner, is, squarely grooved, in, the factum of the apposite seniority list, carrying, depictions of respondent No.5 being senior to the petitioner, being false and erroneous, inasmuch, (i) the initial appointment of the petitioner occurring in the year 1994, (ii) whereas, the initial appointment of respondent No.5, occurring, on 24.06.1995; (iii) AND, with respondent No.5 rendering employment under the respondents w.e.f. 24.06.1995 upto 1996, and, thereafter his standing reengaged, in, the year 1998. (iv) The services of the petitioner being regularized, on 1.4.1998, (v) whereas, the services of respondent No.5 being regularised w.e.f. 1.1.2002. The apposite seniority list, is, borne in Anexure P-5. Since, both, the petitioner, and, respondent No.5., constituted, the purported apposite feeder category, of, surveyors, for theirs hence being considered, for promotion, to the promotional post of J.E., carried in, the establishment of the respondents, thereupon, it is imperative, to, mete an appropriate adjudication, vis-avis, the aforesaid espousal reared before this Court, by the learned counsel appearing, for the petitioner.

(2.) In setting at rest, the aforesaid contention, as, addressed before this Court by the learned counsel appearing, for the petitioner, it is appropriate, to allude to the reply thereto meted, by respondents No.1 to 4. In, the preliminary submissions meted by respondents No.1 to 4, vis-a-vis, the aforesaid averments, cast in the writ petition, (a) a forthright contention is reared, of the petitioner being engaged, as an extra labourer along with other daily waged person, during December, 1994, (b) and his from December, 1994 upto 31.12.1999, hence serving, as, a labourer in different capacities, like, as Beldar, Mason, Carpenter and Supervisor. Muster roll in respect thereof, are appended therewith, as Annexure R- 2 to R-6. Apparently, hence, the initial appointment, of, the petitioner was never, in the capacity, of, a Surveyor. Contrarily, the initial appointment or engagement, of respondent No.5, by the contesting respondent, was visibly as a draftsman, and, engagement whereof, rather occurred, in, the Month of July, 1995, under, an appointment letter issued, in the month of July, 1995, letter whereof is appended as Annexure R-3, with, the amended reply furnished, to, the amended writ petition. Furthermore, respondent No.5, while, serving, as, a draftsman, under respondents No.1 to 4, he, also as displayed, by Annexure R-4 to R-6, held the additional charge, of, Junior Engineer.

(3.) The effect of the aforesaid unrebutted averments, set forth, in the reply meted, by, respondents No.1 to 4, to the apposite therewith aforesaid averments cast in the writ petition, obviously also undermine the vigour of the contention, of the petitioner, of, his since the day of his engagement, in the year 1994, by respondents No.1 to 4, his being reckonable, as senior to respondent No.5, given, the latter being subsequently, engaged, in the year 1995.