AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. Siri Jagan, J.—The petitioner was initially appointed in the Food Corporation of India on 7-7-1975 as an Assistant Wireman. His services were regularized as Wireman Grade II with effect from 11.2.1976. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Electrician-cum-operator in 1983, in the scale of pay of Rs. 290-10-380-12-440-15-485 with effect from 24.12.1983. According to the petitioner, he is eligible for promotion as Assistant Grade III. In 1994, Ext. P1 list was prepared in respect of persons in Category III in the scale of pay of Rs. 290-6-326-8-390-10-400 having matriculate qualification, which, according to the petitioner, is for the purpose of consideration for promotion to the post of Assistant Grade III in the scale of pay of Rs. 290-10-380-12-440-15-485. The petitioner''s name was not included therein. By Ext. P2 dated 29.9.2003, the petitioner claimed promotion to the post of Assistant Grade III with effect from 13.1.1997 when Sri. K. Jyothinath, junior to the petitioner was promoted to that post. By Ext. P3 judgment in W.P(C) No. 2778/2004, this Court recorded the submission of the counsel for the Food Corporation of India that with notice to the petitioner, the matter would be appropriately looked into and orders will be passed within two months. Pursuant thereto, Ext. P4 order was passed on 1.3.2004 rejecting the claim of the petitioner mainly on the ground that the petitioner as Electrician-cum-Operator in the scale of pay of Rs. 290-10-380-12-440-15-485 is in the scale of pay as applicable to Assistant Grade III and that promotion to Assistant Grade III in the 30% vacancy set apart for promotion is from matriculates in Category III working in the scale of pay of Rs. 290-6-326-8-390-10-400 and the petitioner does not fall within the feeder category for such promotion. The petitioner is challenging Ext. P4 order seeking the following reliefs:
i) Call for the records leading to Ext. P4 and issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the same;
ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to promote the petitioner as Assistant Grade III with effect from 13.1.1997, that is the date on which his admitted junior Shri. K. Jyohinath, who was promoted as Assistant Grade III (Depot).
A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents supporting Ext. P4.
I have considered the arguments of counsel on both sides.
Several obstacles stand in the way of granting relief to the petitioner. First obstacle is that of delay. The petitioner seeks promotion with effect from 13.1.1997, when his junior Sri. K. Jyothinath was promoted. When Ext. P1 list of persons in the matriculate Category III officials borne on scale of pay of Rs. 290-6-326-8-390-10-400 has been published on 7.12.1994, the petitioner did not find his place there. He did not challenge Ext. P1. Admittedly, on 13.1.1997, his junior was promoted. He did not challenge that promotion also. In Ext. P2 representation dated 29-9-2003, the last representation he refers to therein is one dated 6.5.2002. The petitioner has not been able to explain the long delay in taking up his case appropriately with the appropriate authorities after 13.1.1997, when his junior was promoted. Secondly, by claiming promotion with effect from 13.1.1997, when his junior Sri. K. Jyothinath was promoted, he is essentially challenging that promotion, which the petitioner cannot do without impleading the said K. Jyothinath. Therefore, the writ petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. Thirdly, the petitioner is not in the feeder category for promotion to the post of Assistant Grade III. The recruitment rule for the said post is admittedly as follows:
Direct: 70%. Promotion 30% from Matriculate Cat III employees holding posts in the scale of Rs. 290-6-326-8-390-10- 400/Matriculate Cat.IV employees with 3 years experience in any cadre/lateral transfer of matriculate Vehicle Driver Gr. I.
The petitioner is neither a matriculate Cat. III employee in the scale of pay of Rs. 290-6-326-8-390-10-400 nor a matriculate Cat. IV employee with three years experience in any cadre. Therefore, he is not a person in the feeder category for such promotion. Of course, the petitioner has got a contention in the reply affidavit that after 1983, there is no scale of pay of Rs. 290-6-326-8-390-10-400 in the Food Corporation of India. But, he does not have a case that Sri. K. Jyothinath was not in the scale of pay of Rs. 290-400, when he was promoted on 13.1.1997. Lastly, a promotion can only be from a lower post to a higher post. Admittedly, both the posts which the petitioner is holding, namely, Electrician-cum-Operator and Assistant Grade III carry the same scale of pay of Rs. 290-10-380-12-440-15-485. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim as of right promotion to the post of Assistant Grade III.
For the above reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed.