Balak Ram vs The State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The application was filed in the year 2000 before the Tribunal with the following reliefs:

(i) That the impugned order dated 6.7.2000 (Annexure A/4) promoting respondents 5 to 9 by respondent No. 3 without considering the claim of the applicant, may be quashed and set aside.

(ii) That the respondents No. 1 to 4 may be directed to prepare a combined seniority list of Senior Assistants assigning proper place therein to applicant on the basis of his length of service in the cadre of Senior Assistants in his parent Department as well as in the Department of Agriculture and thereafter to hold a Review DPC for considering for promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade II and to promote the applicant on the basis thereof in the said higher rank retrospectively with all consequential benefits of arrears of pay etc.

In the reply, at Paragraph 3, it is stated as follows:

Para 3. Admitted with submission that the applicant opted for his allocation to H.P. Agriculture Department through his option dated 8.6.99 (Annexure R-I). Pursuant to his option his services were finally allocated to Agriculture Department vide office order No. 11-3/99-Ind.-I (Estt.) dated 3.7.99 (Annexure-A-2). On the date of his final allocation there was no vacancy of Supdt. Gr.-II against which he could have been considered for promotion to the post of Supdt. Gr-II in the Department. Subsequently on voluntarily pre-mature retirement of one of the Supdt. Gr-II i.e. Sh. Sarwan Dass, Supdt. Gr.-II, Distt. Industries Centre, Hamirpur w.e.f. 29.2.2000 it was incumbent upon the Department to fill up the post. Accordingly Sh. Chhangan Singh, Sr. Asstt. was promoted as Supdt. Gr-II vide office order No. 4-1/76-Ind-I (Estt.)-III dated 15.3.2000 (Annexure R-2), after final allocation of services of the applicant to H.P. Agriculture Department along with post, thus the applicant was not in any way lien holder in the department. Hence no point of consideration for promotion by the D.P.C. as such.

In case, the petitioner has still any dispute and in view of subsequent developments, he may file appropriate representation before 3rd respondent, in which case 3rd respondent shall duly consider the same with notice to the petitioner and