Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manjit Singh vs Pspcl & Ors on 28 October, 2014
Author: Harinder Singh Sidhu
Bench: Harinder Singh Sidhu
CWP-16206-2013 [ 1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No.16206 of 2013
Date of Decision: October 28, 2014
Manjit Singh Petitioners
Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation
Limited and others ...Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU
Present: - Mr. N.S.Dandiwal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
--
HARINDER SINGH SIDHU, J. (Oral)
This petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents to grant the petitioner the deemed date of promotion at par with respondent No.5 and to amend combined seniority list dated 30.06.1992 and 15.06.2006 (Annexures P-5 and P-6) and the subsequent seniority lists and restore the seniority of the petitioner as in the seniority list dated 31.05.1982 (Annexure P-3).
The petitioner joined the service of the respondents-Punjab State Electricity Board (for short 'the respondent-Board') by way of direct recruitment as a CWP-16206-2013 [ 2] Telephone Supervisor on 03.04.1979. It has been averred that a seniority list of Telephone Supervisors was issued on 31.05.1982, wherein, the petitioner was placed at Sr. No.38 and respondent No.5 was shown at Sr. No.44. In April, 1984, respondent No.5 was promoted as JE-1 (A.A.E.) from the post of Telephone Supervisor by the Board. The petitioner made representations to the respondents requesting that he be given deemed date of promotion at par with respondent No.5, who was junior to him as Telephone Supervisor, but no action was taken on the said representations. On 30.06.1992, a combined seniority list was issued by the respondent-Board, wherein, the name of respondent No.5 figured at Sr. No.44, but this seniority list was neither circulated to nor got noted from the concerned officials including the petitioner.
On 19.04.2000, petitioner was promoted as JE-I by the respondent-Board. His seniority was brought down to Sr. No.67, whereas, respondent No.5 remained at Sr. No.44. On 28.03.2003, respondent No.5 was promoted as Assistant Engineer from JE-I. On 26.12.2006, he was again promoted as AEE and joined as such on 02.01.2007. The petitioner was promoted as Assistant Engineer on 29.10.2007. He retired on 30.04.2009 as AE without getting the benefit of promotion as AEE.
After his retirement, the petitioner kept on
CWP-16206-2013 [ 3]
representing to the respondents to grant him the deemed date of promotion at par with respondent No.5. Ultimately, he served a legal notice dated 14.02.2013 (Annexure P-12) to grant him the deemed date of promotion as JE-I at par with respondent No.5 i.e. April, 1984 as well as consequential promotions and benefits. The respondents replied to the aforesaid notice vide their reply dated 05.03.2013 (Annexure P-13 ) stating that the case of the petitioner for the deemed date of promotion cannot be considered along with respondent No.5 because respondent No.5 is a diploma holder and the petitioner is not a diploma holder. The petitioner has assailed the aforesaid reply (Annexure P-13) by filing the present writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to advertisement dated 02.06.1977 (Annexure P-1), as per which, the qualifications for Telephone Supervisor were as under:
"Telephone Supervisors. (Rs. 200-10- 250/270-15-450) = 19 posts.
Qualification:- (i) Should possess 3 years Diploma in Electric Engineering with electronic or telecommunication as subject. Preference will be given to those who (a) possess higher qualification viz. Bachelor of Electrical Engineering (b) Possess Diploma in Telecommunication Engineering subject (d) has practical experience in the field of CWP-16206-2013 [ 4] electronics or telecommunication OR (ii) Must be Matriculate with Science Subject; and (a) should be either qualified ITI Radio Mechanic Course conducted by the P&I Department. (b) must possess experience of working on telecommunication board or any other electric supply undertaking of repute for at least 4 years, but of which one year must have been spend on carrier Communication system."
It is contended that the petitioner was fulfilling the eligibility criteria at (ii) of the above qualifications and that at the time of joining as Telephone Supervisor, he possessed four years working experience on Telecommunication Networking and resultantly, he was having good practical knowledge at the time of joining. Ld. counsel contends that as the petitioner was fully eligible for the post of Telephone Supervisor, an additional qualification of diploma could not be made a condition for promotion to the next higher post.
I am unable to accept the aforesaid arguments. The qualifications prescribed in the advertisement (Annexure P-1) were for appointment to the post of Telephone Supervisor. The petitioner has not placed on record the relevant rules governing further promotion from the post of Telephone Supervisor to JE-I and the qualification prescribed therefor. He has not been able to dispute with reference to the relevant CWP-16206-2013 [ 5] rules that holding of a diploma is not an essential qualification for the next higher post. Moreover, the petitioner has retired from service on 30.04.2009. His prayer for amendment of the combined seniority list dated 30.06.1992 and 15.06.2006, keeping in view the seniority list dated 31.05.1982 cannot be considered at this stage being highly belated.
For the aforesaid reasons, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed.
28.10.2014 (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU)
gian JUDGE
GIANENDER KUMAR
2014.12.10 15:18
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document