V. Anand and Others vs The Government Tool Room and Training Centre (Regd) and Others M.G. Viswanatha and Others Vs The Government Tool Room and Training Centre (Regd)

Huluvadi G. Ramesh

In W.P. No. 18627/2007, the petitioners have sought for to issue a writ of certiorari to quash for the office orders (Annexures-J and K) issued by the lst respondent and to issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents-1 to 3 to grant them time bound promotion against the posts of Technicians Grade II and to re-fix them in terms of Rules 3, 8 and 19 of the Cadre, Recruitment and Certain conditions of Service Rules of the 1st respondent, retrospectively, mentioned at Annexure-F with all consequential benefits and far such other relief.

In W.P. No. 138/2008, the petitioners have sought for to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents-1 to 3 to grant them time bound promotion as Furnished at para-34 of the petition and as per the final seniority list produced at Annexure-F with all consequential benefits.

According to the petitioners, they all joined the services of the 1st respondent-Organisation (Govt. Tool Room & Training Centre (for short ''GT fit TC'') in different cadres. Pursuant to the revised Cadre and Recruitment Rules, the 1st respondent-Organisation prepared and published Provisional Seniority list of employees with corresponding fixation of scales of day with effect from 24.8.2001 end the same was informed to the concerned by issuing letters Individually. Thereafter, on consulting the recognised Trade Union, final Seniority list was prepared and published, wherein dates were mentioned from which each of the employees will be given the benefit of time bound promotion and re-flxation of the next higher scale of pay as per the new Cadre and Recruitment Rules (for short ''C & R Rules'') retrospectively with effect from 24.8.2001

The grievance of the petitioners is, their juniors were promoted to various posts with higher pay scale even though the petitioners were also eligible for time bound promotion as per the C & R Rules. Though representations were given in this regard to the respondents, there was no reply. The petitioners continued to stagnate in their earlier cadres for no fault of theirs. Hence, this petition.

Heard.

According to the Learned Counsel for the petitioners, petitioners ought to have been given promotions to the next higher cadre with revised pay scale as indicated in Annexure-F.

Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted as per the revised C & R Rules dated 24.8.2001, those petitioners who have completed 10 years of service have been given the next higher pay scale and those who have not been promoted for want of vacancies, their case would be considered on completion of 10 years. As such, issuing of further direction would not arise.

At Annexure-F, the tabular column indicates the present pay scale drawn by some of the employees end time bound advancement, shifting them to next higher pay scale.

Rule 8 of the C & R Rules provides for advancement of employees through time bound promotion policy and re-flxation of scale of pay of the employees who have completed 10 years of service.

In view of the Rule (supra)., those persons including the petitioners would be entitled for shifting on promotion to next higher pay scale on such completion of 10 years. But there is said to be compliance of Rule 8 of C & R Rules. Petitioners and same other employees have been considered to the next higher pay scale and the benefit has been extended. Even then, if the petitioners have got any grievance the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with Rule 8 of C & R Rules.

Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of.