Dismissed

Vinod Kumar v. Hry Hotels Ltd. & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Jan 2012CWP/4901/1993

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil servant working as a Billing Clerk sought a writ of mandamus claiming a right to promotion to Accountant based on superior qualifications and a recommendation. The court held that no right to promotion existed as it depended on vacancy, above-post employees were held back for vacancies, and the petitioner's relative seniority did not validate the claim.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; prayer for promotion claim rejected on merits as no right to immediate promotion established.

Vinod Kumar Vs Hry Hotels Ltd. & Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

CWP No.4901 of 1993

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.4901 of 1993

¶5

Date of Decision: January 2, 2012

Vinod Kumar

.......Petitioner

Versus

The Haryana Hotels Ltd. and others

¶10

.......Respondents

¶11

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA

¶12

Present: Mr.Ashok Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr.KK Gupta, Advocate for the respondents.

¶14

<><><>

¶15

TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J.

¶16

The petitioner, who was working on the post of Billing Clerkcum-Cashier under the Haryana Hotels Limited, filed the present writ petition praying for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to consider his claim for promotion to the post of Accountant.

¶17

Counsel for the parties have been heard at length.

¶18

The Haryana Hotels Limited was a Haryana Government concern and it was running a hotel by the name of Hotel Rajhans at Suraj Kund, Faridabad. The entire administrative and financial control of Haryana Hotel Limited vested with the State of Haryana. The petitioner was initially appointed as Cashier-cum-Billing Clerk vide order dated 14.12.1982 for a period of three months and thereafter was given extensions till 31.7.1984. From 1.8.1984 onwards, the petitioner worked as a Billing Clerk in the Accounts Department of the hotel. Vide order dated 29.3.1989, the services of the petitioner were regularized on the post of Billing Clerk-

¶19

CWP No.4901 of 1993

¶20

¶21

cum-Cashier in the pay scale of `950-1500. The petitioner has stated that he possesses the qualifications of B.Com. and has always worked to the complete satisfaction of his superiors. Reliance has been placed upon the recommendations dated 10.9.1992 made by the Deputy General Manager, Hotel Rajhans which were forwarded to the Managing Director, Haryana Hotels, to consider the name of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Accountant. It is on such basis that the petitioner has made a prayer in the instant petition to be considered for promotion to the rank of Accountant.

¶22

A written statement of the Managing Director of Haryana Hotels Limited was filed. A positive stand taken on behalf of respondent No.1 was to the effect that the channel of promotion from the post of Billing Clerk-cum-Cashier in the pay scale of 950-1500 was to the post of Junior Accountant, in the pay scale of 1200-2000 and then further to the post of Accountant and Senior Accountant in the pay scale of 1400-2600 and 1640-2900 respectively. It was still further averred that the promotion to such post was to be made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit. It was also categorically pleaded that another employee, namely, Ishwar Singh Yadav whose date of joining on the post of Billing Clerk-cum-Cashier was 12.12.1992, i.e. prior to the joining of the petitioner, had yet not been considered for promotion to the post of Junior Accountant. Further stand of respondent No.1 was that there was no immediate proposal of making any promotion to the post of Junior Accountant on account of the fact that there was no vacancy available. The averments with regard to the promotion channel as also the fact that one Ishwar Singh Yadav, senior to the petitioner and having not been promoted to the higher post of Junior Accountant, have gone unrebutted.

¶23

¶24

CWP No.4901 of 1993

¶25

There would be no dispute with the proposition that the petitioner is vested with a right for a fair consideration for purposes of promotion to the higher post. However, such consideration would only materialize as and when the employer choses to fill up the post. The positive stand of respondent No.1 is that promotion from the post of Cashier-cum-Billing Clerk is to the post of Junior Accountant. Even in the cadre of Cashier-cum-Billing Clerk, there is an official, namely, Ishwar Singh Yadav who is, admittedly, senior to the petitioner and has yet not been considered for promotion to the next post i.e. to the post of Junior Accountant. Even the recommendation at the hands of Deputy General Manager, dated 10.9.1992, on which heavy reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner would show that there was no reference to any rule or channel of promotion which would vest a right in the petitioner to be considered for promotion to the post of Accountant. In the light of the discussion held hereinabove, it is clear that no directions can be issued as regards consideration of the petitioner for purposes of promotion to the post of Accountant.

¶26

Be that as it may, during the course of arguments, Shri KK Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, has brought to my notice that Haryana Hotels Limited was merged with the Haryana Tourism Corporation in the year 1999. Learned counsel has produced before me a copy of the combined seniority list of the employees of Haryana Tourism Corporation after merger with the erstwhile Haryana Hotels w.e.f. 1.9.1999. A perusal of such seniority list would show that a common seniority has been drawn for Clerks/Night Auditors/Billing Clerk-cum-Cashier/Store Attendant/Clerk-cum-Typist and all have been reflected in the pay scale of

¶27

CWP No.4901 of 1993

¶28

¶29

`3050-4590. In such combined seniority list of the employees of Haryana Tourism Corporation including the employees of erstwhile Haryana Hotels Limited (respondent No.1), the name of the petitioner appears at Serial No.28. Likewise, the name of Ishwar Singh Yadav is reflected at Serial No.27. That apart, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 has informed the Court that it is only employees in the seniority list upto Serial No.5 who have been promoted to the post of Assistant.

¶30

In the light of the aforesaid factual position, the claim raised by the petitioner in the instant petition is without merit. The writ petition, as such, is dismissed.

¶31

( TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA ) JUDGE

¶32

January 2, 2012 SRM

¶33

Note : Whether referred to the Reporter? Yes/No

Vinod Kumar v. Hry Hotels Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar v. Hry Hotels Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Priyanka & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Seema Goyal and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Pritpal Kaur Gill and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Hamir Singh Vs Surjit Singh and Others

State of Haryana Vs Ram Kishan

State of Haryana Vs Hari Kishan and Ors.