IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) 14579 of 2008. Decided on: August 11, 2011. Pancham Butail …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. For the petitioner Mr. P.P.Chauhan, Advocate. For respondents 1 & 2 Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Asstt. A.G. Surjit Singh, Judge (oral) Petitioner and respondent No. 3 were initially appointed as Clerks, in the Directorate of Education, H.P. Both of them ceased to be members of cadre of Clerks, when they applied for the post of Steno typists, in the said Directorate and were selected and appointed as such. Both of them were appointed on the same date, on the basis of test, conducted by the Director of Education. Their date of appointment was 1.7.1978. Petitioner, being senior in age, was placed above respondent No. 3 in the Seniority List of Steno typists. Respondent No. 3 belongs to Scheduled Caste. On account of reservation provided for Scheduled Caste candidates, respondent No. 3 was promoted as Junior Scale Stenographer in March, 1986, against a post, reserved Whet her report ers of t he l ocal papers may be al l owed t o see t he j udgment ? É2É for SC candidates. Petitioner, who belongs to General Category, was, however, promoted as Junior Scale Stenographer in April, 1989. Even before the promotion of the petitioner as Junior Scale Stenographer, respondent No. 3 had been further promoted as Senior Scale Stenographer, again against a post, reserved for SC candidates. He was promoted to that post on 29.8.1988. Petitioner was promoted as Senior Scale Stenographer later on, i.e. on 11.12.1989. Respondent No. 3 was then promoted as Personal Assistant on 20.11.1997, again against a post, reserved for SC candidates. Petitioner was promoted as Personal Assistant on 12.3.2003, on ad hoc basis. After promotion, petitioner applied to the Director of Education, for re-drawl of Seniority List, so as to show her, above respondent No. 3 in the Seniority List of Personal Assistants. She claimed seniority above respondent No. 3, in view of the law, laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Ajit Singh and Others(II) v. State of Punjab and others, (1999) 7 SCC 209. Director of Education took no decision on that representation. In 2006, Director of Education proposed to promote respondent No. 3, as Private Secretary, treating him senior to the petitioner, in the cadre of Personal Assistants. 2. It appears that the post of Private Secretary, against which respondent No. 3, was allegedly sought to be promoted, was not reserved for Scheduled Caste. Petitioner then filed an Original Application before the then H.P. State É3É Administrative Tribunal, seeking issuance of a direction to respondents 1 and 2, to re-draw Seniority List of Personal Assistants and to show her senior to respondent No. 3 in the said Seniority List, and to consider her for promotion to the post of Private Secretary. On abolition of the said Tribunal in 2008, matter has come to this Court. 3. In reply filed by respondent No. 3, it is stated that both petitioner and respondent No. 3 appeared for a test, for direct recruitment to the post of Steno typists and they were selected in the process and appointed on the same day, i.e. 7.1.1978 and hence, both of them stand on the same footing, in the matter of seniority. He has taken the plea that seniority is not required to be re-drawn, in accordance with law, laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case and the Instructions issued by the Government of H.P., following the dictum of the aforesaid judgment. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. 5. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Union of India and Others v. Virpal Singh Chauhan and Others, (1995) 6 SCC 684, held that where a general category candidate is senior to a reserved category candidate, in the Seniority List of the cadre or post, to which both of them were initially appointed and thereafter reserved category candidate is appointed by way of promotion to higher cadre(s), prior to general category candidate, against the post(s) reserved for such É4É category and subsequently, general category candidate also catches up with that reserved category candidate, on account of appointment by promotion, such general category candidate has to be shown senior to the reserved category candidate, in the higher cadre(s). Based on that judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, Government of H.P. issued Instructions, vide letter No. PER (AP) C-F (1)- 1/95, dated 27th May, 1996, per which Seniority Lists, in respect of the cadres and posts, are required to be re- drawn/ changed, to give effect to the law laid down in that judgment. The aforesaid judgment in Union of India & Others v. Virpal Singh Chauhan and Others, was affirmed by a Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Ajit Singh and Others(II) v. State of Punjab and Others, (1999) 7 SCC 209. 6. In view of the aforesaid Instructions and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, petitioner, who belongs to general category and was placed above respondent No. 3 in the Seniority List of Steno typists, or say the initial (lowest) cadre, to which petitioner and respondent No. 3 were appointed on the same date, is entitled to be placed above respondent No. 3, in the cadre of Personal Assistants, to which post respondent No. 3 was appointed by promotion, earlier to the petitioner, against a post, reserved for SC candidates. 7. Consequently, writ petition is allowed and respondent No. 2 is directed to re-draw Seniority List of É5É Personal Assistants, in accordance with the aforesaid judgments and the instructions issued by the government to implement the said judgments and to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Private Secretary, in accordance with the re-drawn Seniority List. Petitioner shall be entitled to all monetary and pensionary benefits (because, by now, she has retired), in case she, on consideration, is found to be entitled to promotion to the post of Private Secretary. The aforesaid direction be complied with by 30.11.2011. August 11, 2011(PC) (Surjit Singh ), J.