Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 233 (HP)

RANJIT SINGH v. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2013-04-04

R.B.MISRA, RAJIV SHARMA

body2013
JUDGMENT RAJIV SHARMA, JUDGE - 1. THIS Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 06.09.2011, rendered by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 2679 of 2008. 2. "KEY facts" necessary for the adjudication of this Letters Patent Appeal are that the appellant was discharged from the Indian Army on 31.03.2003. He got his name registered for the post of Lecturer (History) vide registration No. 410/03, dated 24.02.2003 in the Ex-servicemen Cell (Employment Exchange Cell for Ex-servicemen). Vide notification, dated 04.08.2005, an amendment was carried out in the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, notified on 29th December, 1973 and Column No. 8 was substituted as under: "Col. No. 8:- Master's Degree in the relevant subject with Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) or its equivalent. Or Two years' integrated M.Sc. Ed. course or an equivalent course." The appellant has obtained his B.Ed. degree in the year, 2007 and has also registered his name as B.Ed. candidate vide registration No. 1090/07 on 21.05.2007. The respondent- State has decided to fill up the posts Lecturer (School Cadre) in the subject of History in the year, 2008. Case of the petitioner was not sponsored by the Employment Cell, since he has obtained his B.Ed. degree only in the year, 2007. In these circumstances, the appellant was not interviewed in the month of August, 2008. 3. MS. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the seniority of the appellant was to be determined on the basis of appellant's earlier registration, dated 24.02.2003 and not on the basis of registration, dated 21.05.2007. 4. THERE is no merit in her contention. The seniority of the petitioner was to be considered for the post of Lecturer (School Cadre) only with effect from the date he has obtained B.Ed. qualification and got his name registered on 21.05.2007. Thus, there is no depression of the seniority in the case of the appellant. The learned Single Judge has taken correct view that the name of the appellant could not be sponsored on the basis of the seniority from the year, 2003. It was to be on the basis of registration in the year, 2007. The applicant was required to possess the qualification as per the amendment carried out in 2005 for the post of Lecturer (School Cadre). It was to be on the basis of registration in the year, 2007. The applicant was required to possess the qualification as per the amendment carried out in 2005 for the post of Lecturer (School Cadre). Accordingly, in view of the discussions and analysis made hereinabove, there is no merit in this Letters Patent Appeal and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs.