Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

They contend that in the tentative seniority list dt.02.07.2010 they had been shown as seniors to Sh. Pradeep Atri and Sh. Praveen Chaudhary, but in the final seniority list published on 2.9.2011, Sh. Pradeep Atri was shown as senior to them, though Sh. Praveen Chaudhary, Sh. Pankaj Gaur and Sh. Arun Bhatia were shown as juniors to them.
(P8 in CWP-18515-2012) (Page 422 of CWP-18515-2012) (Page 412of CWP-18515-2012) 14 of 76 Neutral Citation No:= CWP-18515-2012 and connected cases -15- The direct recruits who were appointed on 5.12.2007 contend that they had no cause of action to question the absorption of Sh. Pradeep Atri till 2.9.2011, when the final seniority list of Asst.Engineers was published, because till then he had not been made senior to them, and they had no cause of action to question the absorption of Sh. Praveen Chaudhary till 28.7.2020, when the tentative seniority list of Executive Engineer cadre was published because till then he had not been made senior to them; and that any challenge to their absorption or seniority before that stage would have been futile since they had no cause of action to assail either their absorption or his seniority.
Direct recruits who were appointed in August,2009 contend that Sh. Pankaj Gaur and Sh. Arun Bhatia were given seniority on 01.05.2017 with effect from 01.05.2008; and in the revised tentative seniority list of Asst. Engineers dt.29.09.2017, for the first time they were shown as juniors to both of them; that they had no cause of action to question the absorption of Sh. Pankaj Gaur and Sh. Arun Bhatia till 29.09.2017, and even if they had approached this Court challenging the same, no relief would have been granted to them because by such absorption, their seniority had not been affected in any way.
We agree with the contentions of the direct recruit Asst. Engineers appointed on 5.12.2007 that they had no cause of action to question the absorption of Sh. Pradeep Atri till 26.08.2011 or of Sh.Praven Chaudhary till 28.7.2020 because till then they had not been made senior to them. Any challenge to their absorption or seniority before that stage would have been futile since they had no cause of action to assail it. Moreover, it is settled law that no public interest litigation will be entertained in service matters and none could have filed such cases challenging their deputation or absorption.
"1. .... Since in the present case, the petitioners themselves have made a voluntary request for their absorption in the respondent Department. So it was not remotely a case that the department compel them for absorption nor the department has a dire need for their absorption. The department has taken the step of their absorption purely on their voluntary request and they had been absorbed in accordance with the department rules. The petitioners themselves submitted their joining after accepting the said condition. Therefore, they are now stopped from filing the instant petition on account of their own act and conduct."( emphasis supplied) However, a diametrically opposite stand is taken by the State later and in the replies filed by the State to the Writ Petitions filed by the direct recruits challenging the absorption and seniority of the private respondents, the absorption of the private respondents is sought to be justified on the ground that at that time there was acute shortage of officers in the PWD (B&R) Department as new direct recruit appointments were being delayed due to pending litigation in the High Court; though the Haryana Staff Selection Commission had sent recommendation of the selected candidates to the Government on 14.11.2006, no appointments could be given as there was stay order by the High Court against their joining; and that in such circumstances, the Government decided to absorb the Officers on deputation who were willing; opinion of the Legal Remembrancer to the Government of Haryana was sought, and after imposing certain conditions, they were absorbed54. It is stated that their absorption is on the recommendation of the Head of the Written Statement in CWP-7706-2011, Para 4, Page 2