IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
C.O.C.P. No. 49 of 2008
Date of Decision : March 4, 2009
Karam Singh
....Petitioner
Versus
B.C.Gupta and another
.....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN
Present : Mr. Ravi Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. M.C.Berry, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab,
for the respondents.
T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral)
Writ petition filed by the petitioner was allowed on 10.7.2000.
The petitioner was deemed to have passed Radio Mechanic Grade-II course
in the year when it was held immediately after 1979 and, accordingly, it was
directed that the deemed date of the promotion shall be determined and the
seniority ascribed to the petitioner in the rank of ASI. Further, the petitioner
was deemed to have passed the Radio Mechanic Grade-I course in the year
when it was held after his seniority has been ascribed as ASI and he was
deemed to have passed in the first attempt in the first course held thereafter.
The seniority of the petitioner in the rank of SI was to be determined,
accordingly, and the deemed date in the said rank, i.e., SI, to be accorded,
accordingly. Thereafter, his name was to be brought on List ‘F’ (Technical)
C.O.C.P. No. 49 of 2008 -2-
and accorded deemingly. As a consequence thereof, the deemed date of the
promotion as Inspector of Police(Technician) was to be granted to the
petitioner. The respondents were directed to determine the deemed date of
the petitioner in the rank of ASI and SI in accordance with the
aforementioned observations and so also his name being brought on List ‘F’
and deemed date of promotion as Inspector(Technician) to be determined
within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order from the
Court. The order passed by learned Single Bench was upheld in LPA No.
531 of 2001 which was decided on 30.11.206.
Reply has been filed by respondent No.1 by submitting his
affidavit dated 19.3.2008. It has been submitted therein that against the
decision of the LPA, the Department filed SLP No. 23566 of 2007, wherein
notice has already been issued to the respondent therein. However, the order
dated 10.7.2000 passed by learned Single Judge has been implemented by the
respondents vide order dated 12.3.2008 (Annexure R.1) and the petitioner
has been granted the deemed date of appointment as Constable(Technician)
w.e.f. 23.3.1972 as well as promotion as Head Constable w.e.f. 1.7.1973, as
ASI w.e.f. 17.11.1979 and as SI w.e.f. 17.3.1986. The petitioner has also
been granted the deemed date of List ‘F” w.e.f. 20.8.1991 as earlier approved
by DGP, Punjab, vide memo dated 10.9.1993.
During the pendency of the contempt petition, the petitioner
filed an affidavit dated 26.7.2008, wherein he stated that the order passed in
the writ petition and the LPA has not been implemented in its letter and spirit
C.O.C.P. No. 49 of 2008 -3-
as after refixation of his seniority, the petitioner has not been promoted as
DSP from the date his juniors had been promoted. As such, the respondents
were bound to refix the seniority, accordingly, and promoted the petitioner.
Respondent No.1 has filed another affidavit dated 12.11.2008 by
stating therein that the petitioner belongs to Technician cadre and not even a
single person who was junior to the petitioner in the Technician cadre has
been promoted to the rank of DSP. However, the officials, who have been
named in the affidavit of the petitioner had been promoted as DSP, belonged
to the Operator cadre. Therefore, their case could not be made the basis for
granting promotion to the petitioner to the rank of DSP.
In view of the above, the order passed by learned Single Bench
on 10.7.2000 and upheld in the LPA No. 531 of 2001 stands complied with.
The present petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Rule is discharged.
However, the petitioner would be at liberty to challenge before
the appropriate forum about there being only one cadre for Operators and
Technicians, in accordance with law, if so, advised.
( T.P.S. MANN )
March 4, 2009 JUDGE
ajay-1