IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 804 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 22, 2010 Sohan Lal …Appellant Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present: Mr. Jangjit Singh Dahiya, Advocate, for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. This appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against order dated 28.6.2010, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant, who belongs to the reserved category of Scheduled Caste. He made a representation dated 3.2.2009 (P-1), to the respondent State claiming that out of total 20 sanctioned posts of the Assistant Secretary, he was entitled for promotion on the basis of the roster point. It is appropriate to mention that the appellant-petitioner was working as an Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-7850 since 27.5.1999. His representation was favourably considered and he was promoted as Assistant Secretary in the pay scale of Rs. 9300-34800, vide order LPA No. 804 of 2010 (O&M) dated 21.8.2009 (P-2). However, barely after 3 months 12 days he was reverted vide order dated 3.12.2009 (P-4). He challenged the aforesaid reversion order in the writ petition from which the instant appeal has emerged. The writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge holding that Smt. Neelam Kanta and others filed C.W.P. No. 1496 of 2009 asserting that the total sanctioned strength of the posts of Assistant Secretary were 20 and as per the reservation policy, 4 posts could have been filled up by the members belonging to the reserved category of Scheduled Castes. They asserted that four persons, namely, Gian Singh, Hawa Singh Bhoria, Darshan Rani and Krishna Gahlawat, who were senior to the appellant Sohan Lal in the category of Scheduled Castes, stood already promoted. There were no other posts belonging to reserve category of Scheduled Caste and, therefore, the orders of promotion of the appellant and another were found beyond their quota. The respondent State afforded to the petitioner an opportunity of hearing before passing the order. The learned Single Judge has referred to the reply filed by the respondent State where specific averments have been made that while passing the order dated 3.12.2009, the petitioner-appellant was personally heard by the Transport Commissioner in the presence of the Additional Commissioner and the Assistant District Attorney. The learned Single Judge has further found that the petitioner-appellant did not disclose the factum of the writ petition having been filed by Smt. Neelam Kanta and others (CWP No. 14596 of 2009). The writ petition was disposed of as having been rendered infructuous vide order dated 11.12.2009. 2 LPA No. 804 of 2010 (O&M) Having heard learned counsel we are of the considered view that the petitioner-appellant has many hurdles in his way to succeed. He has been found beyond quota meant for Schedule Castes category in the promotional post of Assistant Secretary. On the filing of the writ petition by Smt. Neelam Kanta and others where the appellant was party respondent, the petitioner-appellant was given hearing and was then reverted. Thereafter the writ petition was disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. The petitioner- appellant did not even disclose the factum of filing of the petition where he contested the matter as a party respondent. On this ground alone the petitioner-appellant has lost the right of hearing on merit of the controversy. In that regard reliance may be placed on the Full Bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Chiranji Lal v. Financial Commissioner Haryana, (1978) 80 PLR 582 (F.B.). There is, thus, no merit in the instant appeal. In view of the above, the instant appeal fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (A.N. JINDAL) July 22, 2010 JUDGE Pkapoor 3