Punjab-Haryana High Court
Balbir Singh Asi vs State Of Haryana on 6 July, 2012
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
CWP No. 5667 of 2010 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CWP No. 5667 of 2010 (O&M)
Date of Decision : July 06, 2012
Balbir Singh ASI
.... PETITIONER
Vs.
State of Haryana
..... RESPONDENT
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Present : Mr. D.S.Rawat, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)
Petitioner has approached this Court impugning the order dated 19.05.2009 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Inspector General of Police, Rohtak Range, Rohtak, vide which the date of confirmation of the petitioner as an Assistant Sub-Inspector has been changed from 31.08.2006 to 31.08.2008. This, the counsel for the petitioner contends, is not in accordance with law as prior to the issuance of the said order, no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner nor CWP No. 5667 of 2010 (O&M) 2 was he heard. He, on this basis, contends that the said order cannot sustain.
On the other hand, counsel for the respondents, while referring to para-4 of the preliminary submissions, submits that the petitioner had filed two representations dated 05.11.2008 and 14.11.2008 challenging the seniority list dated 24.10.2008, vide which seniority of all the Assistant Sub-Inspectors of Rohtak Range was fixed as per the order of the merit obtained by them in the Lower School Course. Petitioner was given personal hearing on two occasions i.e. 06.11.2008 and 26.11.2008 and after going through the service record, his representation was decided vide order dated 13.02.2009, vide which his seniority was fixed like all other Assistant Sub-Inspectors mentioned in the seniority list dated 24.10.2008. The Assistant Sub-Inspectors of Rohtak Range were confirmed on the basis of seniority list dated 24.10.2008 and considering the representation of the officials, the seniority was accordingly fixed. Reference has also been made by the counsel for the respondents to the order dated 13.02.2009 (Annexure R-3), wherein the representation of the petitioner was duly considered and decided fixing his seniority on 31.08.2006. He contends that the seniority has been fixed as per the statutory Rules governing the service and, therefore, the impugned order is in accordance with law and does not call for any interference by this Court.
I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and with their assistance, have gone through the CWP No. 5667 of 2010 (O&M) 3 records of the case.
It is not in dispute that now the seniority has been fixed of the Assistant Sub-Inspectors of Rohtak Range as per the merit obtained by them respectively in the Lower School Course. The mandate of the Rule is also the same. Petitioner has not been able to point out any person who was lower in merit to the petitioner and has been placed senior to him or has been confirmed prior to the date of confirmation of the petitioner. Petitioner had himself made representations for consideration and fixing the seniority as per the merit list of the Lower School Course which representations, as have been referred to above, were considered by the competent authority resulting in the passing of the order dated 13.02.2009 (Annexure R-
3). The said order is in accordance with law and statutory Rules governing the service and, therefore, the contentions, as raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition, cannot sustain.
Finding no merit in the present writ petition, the same stands dismissed.
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH )
July 06, 2012 JUDGE
pj