Allowed

Prem Chand Sharma and Others v. State of Hry and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Jan 2012CWP/1079/1988

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a writ petition seeking notional promotion for retired direct recruits over officiating promotees appointed beyond cadre strength. The court ordered retrospective benefits for petitioners within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; petitioners to be treated as promoted for retirement benefits; entire exercise to be completed within 12 weeks; arrears to be released.

Prem Chand Sharma and Others Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

[1]

¶2

CWP No.1079 of 1988(O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.1079 of 1988(O&M) Date of Decision:17.01.2012

¶5

Prem Chand Sharma, Assistant Treasury Officer, Bawanikhera District Bhiwani, Haryana and others.

¶6

... Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Haryana, through the Financial Commissioner & Secretary to Government, Haryana, Department of Finance, Chandigarh and others.

¶9

... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

¶11

Present: Mr. Rajiv Atma Ram, Senior Advocate with Mr. Saurav Arora, Advocate

¶12

for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. Kshitij Sharma, AAG, Haryana, for respondents No.1 and 2.

¶14

None for respondents No.3 to 40.

¶15

¶16

Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? NO

¶17

To be referred to the reporters or not? NO

¶18

Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? NO

¶19

K. KANNAN, J. (Oral)

¶20

The writ petition is at the instance of persons, who were direct recruits in the Treasury office with the Government of Haryana to the posts of Assistant Treasury Officers. The petitioners' grievance is that the private respondents had been officiating in the promotion posts as Assistant Treasury Officers and they had been promoted on 08/13.07.1987 to be effective from retrospective dates ranging from 21.10.1965 to 01.05.1985. Referring to the Haryana Finance Department Treasuries (Group B) Service Rules of the year 1962, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner would contend that in terms of Rule 3 Appendix A, the cadre strength of Assistant Treasury Officers was 24 and in the Service Rules of the year 1988, the strength had been increased to 38. In the method of recruitment, which had been set-forth under

¶21

[2]

¶22

CWP No.1079 of 1988(O&M)

¶23

Rule 9 in the case of Assistant Treasury Officers, the posts will be required to be filled in the ratio of 50:50 between the promotees and the direct recruits. The contention is that the persons, who have been promoted, were much above the cadre strength and by the promotions so granted, the entire quota for direct recruits had been consumed. The contention is that the promotees, who have been appointed against the quota reserved for direct recruits must be pushed down in the order of seniority to accommodate the claims of direct recruits within their quota.

¶24

At an earlier hearing, this Court had directed the respondents to give an affidavit giving the details of the persons, who have been promoted to the post of the Assistant Treasury Officer and Sh. V.P. Dudeja, Joint Director has sworn the affidavit giving a tabulation of the posts, which were created/available and the respective dates of creation of posts. The affidavit makes an assertion that the total cadre strength of Assistant Treasury Officers were 61 from 01.11.1966. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioners would contend that in the face of the Rules providing for a particular cadre strength, any increase in strength without amending the Rules themselves would be impermissible. The learned Senior counsel would refer me to Rajasthan Judicial Service Officer's Association v. State of Rajasthan & another, JT 2009(9) SC 686 that cadre strength cannot be increased without orders under the relevant Rules and any notification making such appointment would require to be quashed. In High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan v. Veena Verma, JT 2009(9) SC 678 , Hon'ble the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the same position. The second limb of the argument is that the persons, who have been promoted beyond the cadre strength must be taken as manning ex-cadre posts and they cannot rank as seniors to persons amongst direct recruits, who have to be accommodated within the quota for direct recruits.

¶25

It appears that all the petitioners have already retired. They shall, therefore, be treated as promoted by placing them above persons, who among promotees, were promoted above the cadre strength and accorded the higher scales attached to the promotion posts notionally, in so far as they are relevant for retiral benefits. The entire exercise shall be made within 12 weeks from

¶26

[3]

¶27

CWP No.1079 of 1988(O&M)

¶28

the date of this order and the arrears released to them accordingly.

¶29

The writ petition is allowed on the above terms.

¶30

JANUARY 17, 2012 ( K. KANNAN ) Rajan JUDGE

Prem Chand Sharma and Others v. State of Hry and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Chand Sharma and Others v. State of Hry and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaswant Singh Vs State of Punjab

Harbans Lal Vs H.S.E.B. etc.

Mansa Ram Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Mohan Singh Vs Chief Sale Commissioner Punjab

(O&M) Amar Chand Vs Smt. Kaushalya Devi etc.

Tek Ram & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.