R.S.A.No.144 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A.No.144 of 2008 Date of Decision : 08.10.2009 Ram Kirpal ...Appellant Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. S.K.Verma, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Kulvir Narwal, Addl. AG, Haryana, for the respondents. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the learned first Appellate Court whereby suit for declaration that he is entitled to be promoted to the post of Assistant Painter w.e.f. June 1999 and to the post of Painter from August 2001, was dismissed in appeal. The plaintiff was appointed as a Washing Boy in the year 1983. He is 7th class passed. In the year 1986, the service of the plaintiff was regularized as that of helper. In terms of Haryana Transport Department (Group-C) Rules, 1995, the post of Assistant Painter is a promotional post to be filled up amongst the helpers having passed class 8th. Since, the plaintiff has not passed Class 8th, he was not promoted though his juniors namely Kishore Kumar and Brij Bhushan were promoted in June 1999 to the post of Assistant Painter. On 29.6.2000 vide Ex.D-1, the State Government relaxed the educational qualification of middle R.S.A.No.144 of 2008 2 standard as prescribed under the Rules for giving one time promotion to Class-IV employees of the workshop staff. After the notification relaxing the minimum educational qualification, the plaintiff has been promoted as Assistant Painter in the year 2001. The claim of the plaintiff is that he is entitled to be promoted as Assistant Painter from June 1999, when his immediate juniors have promoted as Assistant Painter. His claim is that since his juniors have been further promoted to the post of Painter, he is entitled to be promoted to the post of Painter as well. Learned first Appellate Court found that on the date when the juniors were promoted in June 1999, the plaintiff was not qualified for promotion as he was not middle standard passed. The plaintiff became eligible for promotion only in view of the notification dated 29.6.2000 Ex.D-1 and he has been accordingly promoted. In view of the said fact, the appellant is not entitled to be promoted from the date his juniors were promoted as on that date he was ineligible for promotion. The argument that the appellant is entitled to be promoted as Painter is not tenable. The notification dated 29.6.2000 grants one time relaxation for promotion to Class-IV employees of workshop staff. It specifically states that this relaxation will be applicable only for promotion to Semi-Skilled posts like Assistant Fitter/Assistant Turner etc. and will not be applicable in respect of Skilled posts above the level of Assistant Fitter/Assistant Turner etc. In view of the said fact, the plaintiff cannot claim promotion to the post of Painter as the relaxation vide notification Ex.D-1 is applicable only for promotion to the post of Assistant Painter. R.S.A.No.144 of 2008 3 In view of the above, I do find any patent illegality or irregularity in the judgment and decree passed by the learned first Appellate Court, which may give rise to any substantial question of law for consideration of this Court in second appeal. Dismissed. 08.10.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE