Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1573 (HP)

Bhagi Rath Sharma v. State of HP

2015-10-28

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR, TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2015
JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 5.10.2009, passed in CWP (T) No. 3837 of 2008, by the learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner came to be dismissed, for short “the impugned judgment”, on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal. 2. It appears that writ petitioner was temporarily promoted vide order dated 13.8.1987, which reads as under: “OFFICE ORDER. Sh. Bhagi Rath Sharma, statistical Assistant in the pay scale of Rs.570-15-600-20-700/25-850-30-1000-40-1080, presently posted at Sheep Brooding Farm, Tehsil Distt. Hamirpur (HP) is hereby promoted as Technical Assistant in the pay scale of Rs.700-25-850/30-1000/40-1200 for a period of three months vice Sh. K.D. Sharma, Tehsil Disttt. Purely temp. as Statistical officer for 3 months in the first instance, and posted ion the Directorate of Animal Husbandry, HP Shimla. The above promotion is purely temporary and will not confer any right/benefit to the above official in the matter of seniority or continuance etc. as such. The above temporary promotion will take effect from the date of actually joining on the higher post.” 3. The order itself clearly provides that promotion was ad hoc and temporary one and did not confer any right, title or benefit to the petitioner. The petitioner-appellant herein without any murmur accepted this order and continued as such till 31st October, 1996 when he was asked to work against the previous post. He had questioned the said order on the grounds taken in the memo of writ petition. 4. The respondents have filed the reply to the writ petition and averred that after making exercise for promotion, regular promotions were made and there was no place for him. Accordingly, he was reverted to his original post. 5. The Writ Court has discussed all these aspects right from paras 9 to 16 of the impugned judgment. Even otherwise, the petitioner has no cause because it was temporary promotion and has not conferred any right title or interest on him. 6. Having said so, the appeal is dismissed along with pending applications, if any, and the impugned judgment is upheld.