Executive Engineer (DS) Punjab Stage Electricity Board Division vs Workers Federation (INTUC)

V.S. Aggarwal, J.—Petitioners seek quashing of award passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Punjab, Chandigarh, dated 17.9.1997. By virtue of the impugned award, the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Punjab, Chandigarh, had answered the reference in favour of workman. It was held that he is entitled to get the seniority in the cadre of Lower Division Clerk w.e.f. 28.9.1977 and is also to avail the benefit of proficiency step-up by treating his service as regular with effect from the said date.

The relevant facts are that Ramesh Dutt workman joined as a Peon in Punjab State Electricity Board on 16.11.1976 on ad hoc basis. His services were regularised on 15.2.1977 with effect from 16.11.1976. He was promoted as Lower Division Clerk on ad hoc basis and joined as such on 28.9.1977. The petitioners regularised his services as Lower Division Clerk with effect from 11.5.1981. The workman served a demand notice on 20.4.1977. The dispute was referred to the industrial Tribunal. The Industrial Tribunal vide the award dated 17.9.1997 held that the workman is entitled to get the seniority in the cadre of Lower Division Clerk w.e.f. 28.9.1977 and to avail the benefit of proficiency stepup treating his service as regular w.e.f. the said date, with all consequential benefits. The petitioners seek quashing of the said award.

In the written reply filed by respondent No. 1, it has been asserted that according to the mode of appointment prescribed in Rule 8 of the Punjab State Electricity Board Ministerial Services Class III Regulation 1985, appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk is to be made 83% of vacancies by direct recruitment; 15% by promotion from employees of the Board belonging to Class IV. 2% of the vacancies are also reserved which are not relevant for the purposes of the present writ petition. The workman Ramesh Dutt was initially appointed as a Peon on 16.11.1976. His services were regularised as workman w.e.f. 16.11.76 i.e. from the date of his initial appointment. He was promoted to the post of Lower Division Clerk against 15% promotion quota on ad hoc basis. Though he was shown to have been promoted on ad hoc basis but his promotion was made according to the rules. He worked there uninterruptedly. Thus, the award of the Industrial Tribunal was stated to be valid and in accordance with the provisions of law.

The sole argument advanced on behalf of the petitioners was that since respondent-workmen had been promoted on ad hoc basis, therefore, the said service rendered on ad hoc basis cannot be counted for the purpose of seniority and other benefits. Both the petitioners and respondent relied upon the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Chambel Singh v. State of Haryana and Anr., 1995(1) RSJ 382, wherein it was held that merely because there was no break in service cannot be construed as a factor entitling such an incumbent to tag the period spent by him as an ad hoc employee. The decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers Association v. State of Maharashtra, 1990(2) R.S.J. 73 was referred with advantage. In the cited decision, the Supreme Court has clearly held that if the appointment is as per rules and not by way of a stop gap arrangement and only a procedural formality is required to be complied with then the service rendered will be taken into account towards seniority. It was further held that if the appointment is otherwise regular except for the deficiency of certain procedural defects, such defect/defects stand cured with the subsequent regularisation.

In the peculiar facts of the present case, the decision of the Supreme Court, indeed, and that of Chambel Singh''s case (supra) helps the respondent- workman. According to the workman, he was promoted against 15% quota meant for class IV employees including Peons. The Industrial Tribunal has noted as a fact that the workman had been promoted against the said quota and there is no denial to this effect in the written statement. It was a regular post. Once it is a regular post and the promotion has been made in accordance with the rules to which there is no denial even during the course of hearing of the writ petition, it must follow that the decision of the Supreme Court in Direct Recruit Class-II Engineering Officers Association and others case (supra) squarely goes against the assertions of the petitioners. Merely describing his promotion as ad hoc will not affect his seniority etc. It was for all practical purposes and a regular promotion. There were certain procedural defects which can be cured when regularised subsequently. The Industrial Tribunal, in these circumstances, rightly passed the impugned award.

For these reasons, the writ petition being without merit must fail and is dismissed.