Durga Dutt vs State of Haryana and Others

Augustine George Masih, J.—By this order I propose to dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 17988 of 2010 and 11095 of 2011 by this common order, wherein both the petitioners have approached this Court for their claim for promotion to the post of Electrician. During the pendency of the writ petition, respondent No. 4-Jasbir Singh (in CWP No. 17988 of 2010) has been reverted by the official respondents, forcing him to file Civil Writ Petition No. 11095 of 2011. Counsel for the official respondents has referred to the written statement filed by the official respondents in Civil Writ Petition No. 17988 of 2010, wherein in Para 3 it has been observed that the matter is being looked into in the light of service rules.

Counsel for the petitioner in Civil Writ Petition No. 17988 of 2010 states that the promotion of the petitioner has already been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 13732 of 1996 (Mulakh Raj Vs. State of Haryana and others), decided on 12.01.1998 (Annexure P-5). He, therefore, contends that the petitioner, being fully eligible, especially when his promotion on the post of Assistant Electrician has been upheld by this Court, is entitled to promotion to the post of Electrician as from the date of his appointment, he is performing the duties of an Electrician. He, therefore, contends that the petitioner deserves to be promoted on the post of Electrician.

Counsel for the petitioner in Civil Writ Petition No. 11095 of 2011 submits that although the petitioner was initially appointed as an Assistant T.V. Repairer but thereafter has been promoted to the post of T.V. Electrician on an ex-cadre post and his performing the said duties till today. This promotion was made on 19.11.1996. He contends that although the petitioner is working on an ex-cadre post and is salary is being drawn against the post of Carpenter but since he is working on the said post, at this belated stage, he should not be reverted.

Keeping in view the respective submissions made by counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that the interest of justice would be served by permitting both the petitioners to file their detailed respective representations to the Financial Commissioner & Principal Secretary, Government of Haryana, Transport Department-respondent No. 1 within a period of two weeks from today, highlighting therein their respective claims duly supported by the documents, if required. If such representations are made within the stipulated time, the same shall be considered and decided by the said authority within a further period of three months from the date of submission of the representations.

In case the claim of the petitioners is not to be accepted, a well reasoned and speaking order be passed and conveyed to them.

The interim order passed by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 11095 of 2011 (Jasbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others), whereby status-quo as on date was ordered to be maintained, shall continue to operate 10 days beyond the date of decision on the representation of said petitioner and is served on him. This would be necessitated only in case representation is not accepted. It is clarified herein that in case no representation is filed within the time stipulated, it would be open to respondent No. 1 to consider the claim in the absence of the representations on the basis of records available and pass appropriate orders.