Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 835 (HP)

Pushp Lata v. State Of H. P.

2010-05-19

KURIAN JOSEPH, SURJIT SINGH

body2010
ORDER : Kurian Joseph, C.J., Oral Petitioner's grievance is against the promotion of her junior, Bimla Chauhan to the post of Assistant Malaraia Officer. Admittedly, the post was reserved for a scheduled caste candidate. Bimla Chauhan was junior to the petitioner and was being reflected as a scheduled caste employee in the seniority list, since long. Petitioner claims that she too belongs to a scheduled caste and, therefore, the post should have been offered to her, she being senior to Bimla Chauhan. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. 3. We find on record photostat copy of the first sheet of service book of the petitioner, which though does not very specifically indicate that the petitioner belongs to a scheduled caste, yet the words 'Indian (Harijan) (sub caste Koli)' are written against the column 'race' and the term 'Harijan' is used for scheduled caste, in this part of the country. 4. Respondents do not deny in their reply that the petitioner belongs to a scheduled caste category, but they say that in the seniority lists, which were being circulated since 1989, she is reflected as general category employee and she never made any representation in that regard. 5. Petitioner's case from the very beginning, even at the time when she made representation in the year 2003, on coming to know that her junior was getting more salary, has been that she never came to know about the seniority list, on account of her having remained posted in the field throughout. 6. We are of the view that even if the petitioner was not being shown as a scheduled caste employee in the seniority list, that will not change the factual position that she belongs to a scheduled caste and that being so, she ought to have been considered for promotion against the post reserved for scheduled caste category and against which Bimla Chauhan was promoted. 7. 7. In view of the above stated position, we direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion, on account of her being a scheduled caste employee, from the date when Bimla Chauhan, was promoted and in case on such consideration it is found that she was fit for promotion, she be given promotion from that date by creating a supernumerary post and in that situation all consequential benefits, including monetary benefits, shall be available to her. 8. Writ petition stands disposed of.