PANCHAM SINGH Vs. DIRECTOR HEALTH SERVICES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the basis of order dated: 5 8 1983 by which the petitioner was promoted as Junior Health Inspector in the Pay -scale of Rs. 470 850 in his own pay and grade, the petitioner has successfully availed of the benefits of the order despite the impugned order Annexure p3. On the basis of the aforesaid order he filed the present petition, obtained a stay and is continuously holding the post with all the consequential benefits. According to the petitioner the order (Annexure p3) impugned in the petition, amounted to punishment resulting in reduction of rank which was not warranted in law. It is submitted that the impugned order was in violation of the provisions of Art. 311 of the Constitution. It is contended that the so called order of promotion was issued by the competent authority and could not have been kept in abeyance without affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.

(2.) IN the reply affidavit filed in the case, Shri, J. K. Sharma, Director of Health Services, has stated that the Chief Medical Officer was not competent to pass the order in favour of the petitioner which was alleged to be irregular promotion without considering the seniority of others which was maintained at the divisional level It is submitted that the promotions are made at the divisional level and not at the district level as was done in the case of the petitioner. The order of promotion was not confirmed and was kept in abeyance. It is further submitted that there were some basic health workers who were far senior to the petitioner as per the seniority list of the category of service as well as in the district Doda to which the petitioner belongs, such aggrieved health workers had filed appeals before the Director, Health Services, against the order passed in favour of the petitioner. The Director, Health Services has claimed that he was competent to revoke the irregular promotion made by the CMO. There was no criterion fixed -while passing the order in favour of the petitioner, which resulted in injustice to the persons who were senior than the petitioner.

(3.) IN his rejoinder the petitioner has submitted that the post of junior health inspector was a district cadre post as defined in SRO -588 of 1969 dt : 21 -10 -1969 as amended from time to time. It is submitted that seniority was no criteria for making promotions and as the petitioner possessed superior merit, the GMO was justified in promoting him without considering the cases of others who were referred to be as senior than the petitioner.