Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. The petitioner further submitted yet another discrimination committed by the sixth respondent for appointing him in the cadre of Class-III. Initially, he was selected as Micro Processor Operator (MPO) in October 1992 and since then he worked in Data Processing Department of Corporation's Indiranagar Branch Office under direct supervision of the sixth respondent and jurisdictional control of the fifth respondent. Due to the exigency in the Corporation and since the employee posted against established substantive post of Higher Grade Assistant (Programmer-II) was absent without applying for leave for over two years and a lady Micro Processor Operator on the posted strength was on Maternity Leave and another lady Micro Processor Operator was relieved from duty on transfer to Chennai Division of the Corporation; and since the petitioner was left as the only employee against the strength of one Higher Grade Assistant (Programmer-II) and three Micro Processor Operators and in the process, he has performed the duties of the Data Processing Department (including the duties of Higher Grade Assistant (Programmer-II) and two Micro Processor Operators) all alone with staggered and long working hours with due diligence and devotion for no extra monetary benefits. The petitioner further submitted that he, single-handedly, has served the Corporation even on the substantive cadre of Higher Grade Assistant (Programmer-II).