A. Vijayalakshmi vs The Director of Employment and Training

K.K. Sasidharan, J.—Challenge in this Writ Petition is to the condition incorporated in the Government Order in G.O. (Ms). No. 123, Labour and Employment Department, dated 06.09.1996, whereby and whereunder, the Government have made it clear that the upgradation of Typist Grade-I would take effect from the date of filling up of the post.

BRIEF FACTS:

The petitioner joined the Government service as Typist on 10.11.1980. She was awarded Special Grade on 29.06.2001, after completing 20 years of service. The petitioner was awarded Grade-I in the post of Typist, on the basis of the Government Order in G.O. Ms. No. 45, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Per. B) Department, dated 15.02.1994. As per the said Government Order, Grade-I would be awarded to the Typist on completion of 18 years of service. The services of the petitioner were regularized on 28.06.1981. According to the petitioner, she should have been awarded Grade-I on 28.06.1999. But, she was awarded Grade-I only on 02.08.2007. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the Government issued an order in G.O. (Ms). No. 123, Labour and Employment Department, dated 06.09.1996 with regard to upgrading of five posts of Typist as Typist Grade-I. In the said Government Order, it was stipulated that upgradation would take effect only from the date of filling up of posts. The said condition is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that filling up of the post cannot be the material date for upgrading the post.

The Joint Director (Craftsmen Training) Department of Employment and Training filed a counter-affidavit in answer to the contentions raised in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. According to the Joint Director, completion of 18 years of service as Typist is the basic eligibility condition for inclusion in the panel for promotion to the post of Typist Grade-I. There were only five posts of Typist Grade-I and the same have to be filled up as per seniority. Since there was no vacant post of Typist Grade-I, the petitioner was not considered for promotion, notwithstanding the fact that she had already completed 18 years of service. According to the Joint Director, promotion could be made to the post of Typist Grade-I only in case there is a vacancy. The Government Order is, therefore, perfectly correct and does not call for interference.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents.

DISCUSSION:

The Government Order in G.O. (Ms). No. 123, Labour and Employment Department, dated 06.09.1996 and more particularly, the condition incorporated in paragraph 5 is challenged primarily on the ground that the date of filling up of the post cannot be taken as the crucial date for awarding Special Grade.

The petitioner appears to be under a misconception that the moment she completed 18 years of regular service, she is entitled for upgrading as Typist Grade-I, irrespective of the fact as to whether there is actually a vacancy to grant such upgradation.

The counter-affidavit filed by the Joint Director (Craftsmen Training) Department of Employment and Training very clearly shows that the sanctioned strength of Typist Grade-I was 5 as on the date on which the petitioner completed 18 years of service. The petitioner completed 18 years of service on 28.06.1999. Even though there were five posts of Typist Grade-I, the fact remains that all such posts were filled up by Typists, who were senior to the petitioner.

The impugned Government Order in G.O. (Ms). No. 123, Labour and Employment Department, dated 06.09.1996 itself contains the details regarding the total number of posts. Paragraph 3 of the said Government Order shows that out of 7 Typists, 2 Typists have already retired from service and 5 Typists have expressed their willingness to remain as Typist. The Government, therefore, decided to upgrade five posts of Typist as Typist Grade-I, keeping in abeyance five posts of Typist (Ordinary Grade). It was only under such circumstances, the Government have made it clear that the upgradation would take effect from the date of filling up of those posts.

The Typists, who have rendered 18 years of service, are eligible to move to the post of Typist Grade-I. There is no automatic upgrading in the absence of a post.

The petitioner wanted upgradation only on the ground that she completed 18 years of regular service as on 28.06.1999. Even to obtain the benefits of the Government Order in G.O. Ms. No. 45, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Per. B) Department, dated 15.02.1994, there should be a vacant post of Typist Grade-I. The petitioner has no case that there were vacant posts of Typist Grade-I and in spite of the said factual position, she was not considered for promotion. The petitioner cannot be heard to say that without there being a post, she should be given upgradation as Typist Grade-I. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the contention taken by the petitioner.

In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.