Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1537 (HP)

Rajesh Thakur v. State of H. P.

2011-03-21

KULDIP SINGH

body2011
JUDGMENT Kuldip Singh, Judge The petitioner in the petition has prayed mainly the following reliefs:- (a) The respondents may kindly be directed to consider the applicant for promotion and promote him to the post of Lecturer (School Cadre) from the due date when the vacancy was available to the share of the applicant in promotion quota by holding meeting of the D.P.C. on year to year basis in accordance with law with all consequential benefits and arrears of salary etc. (b) The respondents may kindly be directed to decide the representations submitted to the respondent No.2 immediately in the interests of justice. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was appointed as T.G.T. and many persons who were junior to him were promoted as Lecturers (school cadre) but the petitioner was ignored without any basis. The petitioner has filed the present petition for promotion as Lecturer (school cadre) from the date his juniors were promoted as such. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner is also entitled to seniority, back wages as Lecturer (school cadre) from the date his juniors were promoted. The respondents No.1 and 2 have filed the reply on the affidavit of respondent No.2 and have stated that petitioner has also been given benefit from the date when his juniors were promoted as Lecturers w.e.f. 9.8.2000 on notional basis vide office order No. EDN-H(19)B(1)6/2010-promotion dated 21.12.2010. The petitioner will be entitled for seniority as Lecturer from the date 9.8.2000. 3. The respondents have taken categorical stand that the petitioner has been promoted as Lecturer w.e.f. 9.8.2000 and he will get the seniority as Lecturer w.e.f. 9.8.2000. The petitioner was ignored without any basis when his juniors were promoted. Therefore, now the petitioner is entitled not only seniority as Lecturer (school cadre) w.e.f. 9.8.2000 but also the pay fixation. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner should also be allowed back wages w.e.f. 9.8.2000 is rejected for the reason that the petitioner factually has not worked as Lecturer (school cadre) w.e.f. 9.8.2000 till he was promoted as such. The petition is disposed of on above terms.