Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 378 (HP)

Rangila Ram v. State Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.

2021-07-07

SANDEEP SHARMA

body2021
JUDGMENT Sandeep Sharma, J. - Petitioner, who is a diploma holder in Civil Engineering, was appointed as Work Inspector on daily wage basis w.e.f. 1.6.1990 in the department of PWD, Himachal Pradesh. Services of the petitioner, subsequently, came to be regularized w.e.f. 21.3.2003 in terms of the regularization policy framed by the State of Himachal Pradesh and in that process, was assigned Seniority No. 1133 in the final seniority list of Work Inspectors issued by the respondents. However, subsequently, pursuant to the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court, in CWP filed by some of the similarly situate persons, regularization of the petitioner against the post in question was also made from the retrospective date and accordingly, the corrigendum was issued by respondent No.2 to this effect and seniority number of the petitioner was changed from 1133 to 967(A) (Annexure A-1). Reply of the respondents revels that the category of Work Inspector alongwith 27 other industrial and non-industrial categories stands re-designated as Junior Technician with job specification vide Govt. notification No.Fin-(C)B(7)-6/88-VI dated 30.8.1997, followed by Notification No. Fin-(C)B(7)-6/88-VI dated 24.3.1998 w.e.f. 1.1.1986, (Annexure R-1 alongwith reply field by the respondents). Newly formed category of Junior Technician came to be granted three tier pay scale in the ratio of 20:30:50 as per their circle seniority. The Junior most 50% of the total cadre strength of Technician is to be placed as Junior Technician (Work Inspector) in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 3120- 5160, next senior 30% as Technician Grade-II (Work Inspector) with pay scale of Rs. 4020-6200 and the senior most 20% are to be placed as Technician Grade-I (Work Inspector) in the pay scale of Rs. 4550-7220, w.e.f. 1.1.1996. Petitioner being appointee of year 1.1.2001 as Work Inspector was to be placed as Junior Technician (Work Inspector) in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.3120-5160 in terms of notification dated 30.8.1997 (Annexure R-1). Thereafter, as per circle seniority of Junior Technician Work Inspector) to which the petitioner belongs, he was to be placed as Technician Grade-II (Work Inspector) and thereafter, as Technician Grade-I Work Inspector) in the ration of 20:30:50. The category of Work Inspector now Junior Technician (Work Inspector) is one of the feeder category for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil). The category of Work Inspector now Junior Technician (Work Inspector) is one of the feeder category for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil). Petitioner being fully qualified to be promoted to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) came to be promoted w.e.f. 31.12.2005, against 3.5% quota meant for Diploma holder Junior Technician (Work Inspector) under Clause-11 (iv) of R&P Rules of Junior Engineer (Civil) i.e. Annexure A-2. Though pursuant to aforesaid promotion order issued by the respondent, petitioner joined on 4.1.2006, but since he was not granted promotion immediately after completion of three years service in the feeder category of diploma holder Work Inspector, he made representations to the department to promote him to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) against 3.5 % quota meant for diploma holder from the date of his having completed three years service in the feeder category i.e. Work Inspector now Junior Technician. Besides above, petitioner also claimed higher pay scales in the cadre of Work Inspector now Junior Technician (Work Inspector), but such prayer of him was also not acceded to by the respondents on the ground that after the issuance of notification dated 30.8.1997, common category of Junior Technician (Work Inspector) has been granted three tier pay scale which has been further clarified by the Government/Finance Deptt. vide letter No. Fin(PR) B(7)-45/2010 dated 29.5.2014. 2. As per respondents, after revision of 1.1.1996, pay scale of Rs. 5000-8100/- never remained in force and as such, he is not entitled to be granted higher pay scale. In the aforesaid background, petitioner filed OA No. 2992 of 2017 before the Erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal, praying therein for following reliefs: (a) That the respondents may very kindly be directed to promote the applicant as Junior Engineer from amongst the category of Work Inspector (Diploma Holder in Civil Engineering) after completion of 3 years service on the post of Work Inspector by convening a review D.P.C. with effect from 2004 with all consequential benefits to pay, arrears, seniority et. (b) That the applicant be granted the pay scale of Rs.5000-8100 to the post of Work Inspector from the date of regularization i.e. 1.1.2001 upto the period the applicant worked on the post of Work Inspector with all consequential benefits. 3. (b) That the applicant be granted the pay scale of Rs.5000-8100 to the post of Work Inspector from the date of regularization i.e. 1.1.2001 upto the period the applicant worked on the post of Work Inspector with all consequential benefits. 3. After the abolition of the Erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal, aforesaid Original Application came to be transferred to this Court for adjudication and now same stands re-registered as CWPOA No. 2063 of 2020. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Careful perusal of the corrigendum dated 28.4.2012 (Annexure A-1) clearly reveals that petitioner came to be regularized against the post of Work Inspector w.e.f. 1.1.2001 and as such, he became eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) against 3.5% quota meant for Diploma holder Junior Technician (Work Inspector) under Clause-11(iv) of R&P Rules of Junior Engineer (Civil) w.e.f. 1.1.2004 i.e. Annexure A-2. 6. In the case at hand, respondents promoted the petitioner to the post of Junior Engineer w.e.f. 31.12.2005, whereas as per clause-11 (IV) of R&P Rules, of Junior Engineer (Civil), petitioner ought to have been considered for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) immediately after completion of three years of service in the feeder category of diploma holder i.e. Work Inspector. Since in the case at hand, petitioner was regularized w.e.f. 1.1.2001 vide corrigendum dated 28.4.2012, he had become eligible to be promoted against the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) on 1.1.2004, whereas in the case at hand, petitioner was promoted to the post of Junior Engineer w.e.f. 31.12.2005 against 3.5% quota meant for Diploma Holder Junior Technician. Respondents in their reply, though have virtually admitted that the petitioner had become eligible to be promoted to the post of Junior Engineer after completion of three years service in feeder category of diploma holder Work Inspector, but they have stated in their reply that such promotion could not be granted automatically, rather same could be made subject to the availability of vacancy. 7. 7. Respondents have claimed that since no post of Junior Engineer (Civil) was available in the quota meant for Diploma Holder Junior Technician Work Inspector when the petitioner had completed three years service in the feeder category, diploma holder Work Inspector, he was rightly not promoted w.e.f. 1.1.2004 against the 3.5% quota meant for Diploma holder Junior Technician (Work Inspector). Since there is no dispute inter-se parties that petitioner after having become regularized in the feeder category of Work Inspector in the year, 2004, had become eligible to the promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) Annexure A-2, there appears to be no necessity to refer /take into consideration R&P Rules framed by the respondent-State for regulating the services of the Junior Engineer (Civil). 8. Precise ground raised by the respondents for not promoting the petitioner to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) immediately after his having completed three years is that no post of Junior Engineer (Civil) was available. However, aforesaid claim put forth by the respondents has been seriously disputed by the petitioner, in rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents, wherein petitioner has categorically stated that similarly situate persons were promoted to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) w.e.f 15.3.2003. Having carefully perused averments contained in the rejoinder, which is duly supported by an affidavit as well as documents annexed therewith, this Court finds that two persons namely Jagdeep Bhagchandani and Vipin Kumar were promoted as Junior Engineer w.e.f. 15.3.2003 and 17.3.2007, respectively. 9. Besides above, this Court finds that petitioner has also placed on record vacancy position of Junior Engineer other than Tribal/ difficult area as on 31.7.2004 (Annexure P-10 available at page 113 of the paper book). Aforesaid document clearly reveals that on 31.7.2004, 85 posts of Junior Engineer were available in the State of Himachal Pradesh that too in the areas other than Tribal /difficult area. Aforesaid facts and documents placed on record by the petitioner by way of rejoinder have been not refuted/disputed by the respondents and as such, there is no reason for this Court to disbelieve the same. Aforesaid facts and documents placed on record by the petitioner by way of rejoinder have been not refuted/disputed by the respondents and as such, there is no reason for this Court to disbelieve the same. Since claim of the petitioner to the post of Junior Engineer against 3.5% quota meant for Diploma holder Junior Technician (Work Inspector) was to be considered after completion of three years service in the category of diploma holder, Work Inspector, petitioner, who was regularized w.e.f. 1.1.2001, ought to have been promoted to the post Junior Engineer (Civil) against 3.5% quota w.e.f. 1.1.2004. However, in the case at hand, respondents have granted promotion to the petitioner w.e.f. 31.12.2005 and they have claimed before this Court by way of reply filed on affidavit that in the year, 2004 there were no posts of Junior Engineer (Civil) available, whereas such claim of the respondents put forth before this court is totally contrary to the record adduced on record by the petitioner by way of rejoinder filed to the reply filed by the respondents. In the year, 2004, not only 85 posts of Junior Engineer in the State were available, but respondents while adopting pick and choose method, granted promotion to the similarly situate persons w.e.f. 2003 and 2007. Since posts were available in the year 2004, when petitioner had completed three years service in feeder category of the diploma holder Work Inspector, case of the petitioner ought to have been considered by the respondents from due date i.e. 1.1.2004. 10. Since issue with regard to grant of higher pay scale in the cadre of Work Inspector now Junior Technician stands settled inter-se petitioner and respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the relief qua the same in the instant petition. 11. Consequently, in view of the detailed discussion made herein above, present petition is allowed and respondents are directed to promote the petitioner as Junior Engineer from amongst the category of work inspector (diploma holder in Civil Engineering) from the date of his having completed three years service in the feeder category by convening a review DPC w.e.f.1.1.2001, with all consequential benefits. In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any.