CWP No.12942 of 1999 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.12942 of 1999 Date of decision : 22-07-2010 Sudesh Kumari .... Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Puri, Addl. AG, Punjab. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (Oral) Petitioner was appointed as a Peon by respondent No.4 vide Appointment Letter (Annexure P-1) on 9.03.1977. Her services were regularized w.e.f. 11.10.1978. While in service, petitioner improved her educational qualification. Admittedly on the basis of her acquired qualification, she could be promoted to Class-III service. On 1.09.1980, vide order (Annexure P-7) she was promoted to the post of Clerk for the time being in her own pay scale on temporary basis. The promotion order further stated that on joining of a regularly selected candidate she will be liable to reversion. Petitioner indeed was reverted on 17.01.1981 vide order at Annexure P-8. The order of reversion has been challenged. It is further prayed that petitioner should be promoted to Class-III post. State Government has taken a stand that when the temporary promotion was given to the petitioner, at that time, a Class-IV employee was required to have three years' experience. Later fresh instructions were issued and the requisite CWP No.12942 of 1999 -2- period of experience was raised to five years. When the petitioner was temporarily promoted, she was not having three years' experience. Later, when an avenue of promotion arose, she was not having five years' experience. Furthermore, she was lower in the seniority list as she was listed at seniority No.40 in level of District cadre, and whereas at Sr. No.370 in the State level cadre. Therefore, on the basis of seniority, she was not eligible to be appointed in Class-III post as she could not steal march over her seniors. Mr. J.S. Puri, Addl. AG, Punjab has stated that on the basis of seniority, a promotional avenue occured and the petitioner was promoted as on 20.08.2009. After hearing counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that order of promotion (Annexure P-7) was purely temporary in nature as petitioner was promoted in her own pay-scale and no vested right accrued to her as it was made explicit clear in the promotion order that it was subject to reversion on joining of a duly selected candidate. Furthermore, as per the stand taken by the State Govt. that she was lower in the seniority list and was not entitled to promotion at the relevant time, no direction for promoting the petitioner from the date when her juniors were promoted can be issued to the respondents as at that relevant time, she was not having requisite experience. Hence, there is no merit in the present petition and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) 22-07-2010 JUDGE manju