HARJIT SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN furtherance of an endeavour to steal a march over the head of the respondent 3, the writ petitioner -appellant sought his placement in the pay scale of Rs. 1200 -2040 on the ground that the writ petitioner and the respondent 3 were appointed as Drivers in the year 1990 and 1993 respectively, therefore, claim for placement in the seniority list ahead of the respondent 3. How far the material placed along with the writ petition helps the cause of the appellant, relevant is to reproduce the communication dated 21 -01 -1997: "OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER P.W.(R&B) DEPTT. JAMMU. No. 17833 Dated. 21 -1 -97 The Executive Engineer, Const. Division No. IV, Jammu. Subject: Establishment - - S. Harjeet Singh, Driver. Ref: Representation of Harjeet Singh, driver dated Nil. S. Harjeet Singh driver has represented regarding his seniority position in the list of Drivers circulated under this office No. 15702 -32 dated 19 -12 -1996. In this connection, it is for the information of the driver that his seniority is to be reckoned from the date of his conversion into regular establishment. The Driver was brought on regular establishment vide Govt. Order No. 170 -PS of 1995 dated 23 -3 -1995 and subsequently formal orders issued vide this office No.CEJ/206 of 1995 dated 31 -3 -1995 w.e.f. 1 -4 -1994 in the pay scale of 750 -940. Therefore, the question of inclusion of his name in the seniority list does not arise. Besides his claim for promotion to the pay scale of 1200 -2040 is not based on valid grounds therefore it can not be entertained. The Driver may be informed accordingly. Sd/ -Chief Engineer PW (R&B) Department, Jammu"

(2.) WITHOUT going into the detail, it clearly transpires that the petitioners services were regularized in 1995 giving retrospective effect from 01 -04 -1994. Believing the communication, the petitioners year of entry to regular service is 1994 and not 1990. The contents of the communication are sufficient to non suit the petitioner but in view of a feeble mention in the writ petition suggesting his dissatisfaction with the facts indicated therein the communication, we would not like to stop here and to put the record straight, it calls for a mention that despite post admission notice, the respondents chose not to come forward with an answer refuting or admitting the averments but such omission would not ipso facto result in grant of relief, for the simple reason that satisfaction of the Court is paramount and it goes without saying that unless the Court is satisfied that the facts urged do constitute a cause for such indulgence, writ cannot be granted notwithstanding absence of the counter.

(3.) IN view of the legal position indicated above, the onus to establish entitlement to conferment of permanent employees status from a date prior to absorption of the respondent 3, remains on the petitioner -appellant which he has to prove on the basis of available material, therefore, a deeper probe into the documents placed on the record by the writ petitioner has become imperative. In this behalf it will be appropriate to examine his case in the light of the recorded entry in his service book which is extracted: "Brought on regular cadre vide Govt. order No. 170 -PS of 1995 dated 23 -3 -1995 issued by the Chief Engineer PWD (R&B) Deptt. Jammus order No.206 of 1994 -1995 dated 31 -3 -1995 and his Endtt. No. 20557 -75 dt.31 -3 -1995 in the pay scale of 750 -940 w.e.f. 1 -4 -1994 as Driver. Sd/ - Executive Engineer".