Krishan Kumar Draftsman vs State Of Haryana And Others on 22 April, 2009

CWP No. 6348 of 2006                 1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH

                               CM Nos. 24332-24333 of 2008 and
                               CWP No. 6348 of 2006

                               Date of Decision: April 22, 2009



Krishan Kumar Draftsman                           ...... Petitioners


      Versus


State of Haryana and others                              ...... Respondents



Coram:      Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari


Present:    Mr. R.S.Sharma, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

            Mr. Tajender Joshi, Advocate
            for applicant-Madan Lal Saini.

                  ****

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?


Ajay Tewari, J.

CM Nos. 24332-24333 of 2008

These applications have been filed by a General category

Head Draftsman for being impleaded as a respondent on the ground that he

is working as a Head Draftsman and that he is admittedly senior to the

petitioner and, therefore, he should be impleaded as a respondent.
CWP No. 6348 of 2006 2

In view of the decision I am proposed to take in the main writ

petition it cannot be said that the applicant is either a necessary or a proper

party.

Consequently the same is dismissed.

CWP No. 6348 of 2006

This petition has been filed for claiming that there are five

posts of circle Head Draftsman which are to be filled up by promotion and

as per the reservation policy the fourth post had to be filled up by a

Scheduled caste candidate. The petitioner claims to be the only eligible

scheduled caste candidate who can be considered for this promotion.

In the written statement the issue regarding applicability of the

reservation policy is not disputed. A plea has been taken that between the

post of Draftsman and Circle Head Draftsman another post of Head

Draftsman exists. Learned counsel for the respondents has referred me to

the Haryana State Forest Department (Group C) Miscellaneous Section Rule

1998. In Appendix A annexed to these rules no post of Head Draftsman

is mentioned. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that this was an

inadvertent omission and actually post of Head Draftsman is very much

existing. I put it to the learned counsel that these rules are in force since

1.1.1998 and if there was some omission it was open to the respondents to

have made appropriate amendment therein. The second plea taken is with

regard to the eligibility of the petitioner. This Court is not to determine

the eligibility of the petitioner to the post to decide whether as per the

extant rules and reservation policy the 4th post had to be filled up by

considering the case of eligible scheduled caste employees for promotion.

Consequently this writ petition is disposed of with a
CWP No. 6348 of 2006 3

direction to the respondents to consider the case of eligible Scheduled caste

draftsman for promotion to the post of Head Draftsman w.e.f. the date 4th

post was vacant.

(AJAY TEWARI)
JUDGE

April 22, 2009
sunita