C.W.P. No.5868 of 1994 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.5868 of 1994 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : 18.10.2011 Santokh Singh Balli PETITIONER VERSUS Punjabi University and others RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Shri Amit Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Vipul Jindal, Advocate for the respondents. MAHESH GROVER, J. This is a petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner has prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari declaring the action of the respondent/University in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade-II by affording him the benefit of the policy of reservation and granting the same benefit to respondent No.2 who is much junior to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and mala fide. A prayer has also been made for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of Superintendent Grade-II and grant him all the consequential benefits attending such promotion. C.W.P. No.5868 of 1994 -2- The facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a Punjabi Typist by the respondent/University on 23.5.1966. He was promoted as a Senior Desk Assistant on 13.12.1974. At the time of his initial appointment, there was no reservation policy prevailing in the University which was however, subsequently made applicable vide resolution dated 17.7.1971. On 27.10.1973, the University issued a letter to all the employees to submit their respective certificates regarding their belonging to the BC/SC category. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner responded and intimated the University that he at the time of appointment itself had furnished the requisite certificate which established that he is a member of the BC. The next promotional post to which the petitioner was entitled to, was Superintendent Grade-II. In 1994 for the first time, the post became available to the members of the BC, but the petitioner was not considered for the said promotion. Instead, respondent No.2 Raghbir Singh was promoted as against the quota of BC. This is the cause of grievance of the petitioner who contends that he being a member of the BC and also being senior to the said respondent Raghbir Singh, ought to have been considered for promotion as Superintendent Grade-II. The respondents have denied the claim of the petitioner by pleading that in accordance with the instructions issued on 2.4.1981, the petitioner was required to furnish a certificate indicating that he came within the prescribed income limit at the time of entering into service, which certificate was never submitted by the petitioner. It was thus, contended that the petitioner having failed to fulfill the requisite conditions, was rightly ignored for promotion. It was further stated in the reply to the petition that the petitioner was appointed against the post of general category, as there was no policy of reservation available in the University pertaining to non-teaching employees and was accordingly promoted as Senior Desk Assistant amongst the general category candidates. His seniority vis-a-vis C.W.P. No.5868 of 1994 -3- the other employees was also maintained in the list of general category candidates and when the promotion was to be made to the post of Superintendent Grade-II, the petitioner, if desirous of claiming the benefit of reservation, was required to furnish the requisite income certificate which he did not do so by the prescribed date. On due consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that the petitioner cannot claim the benefit of promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade-II as against the reserved vacancy, for having failed to comply with the requirements which were expected by a circular having been issued in 1981. There is no denial to the fact that the petitioner has been granted promotion in his own category where he was placed i.e. general category in 1998 and he stands retired in the year 2002. The petitioner having attained the first promotion as Senior Desk Assistant in the general category, and subsequently, as Superintendent Grade-II in 1998, therefore, could not upset the whole arrangements after coming into force of the policy of reservation more so, when he failed to comply with the requisites thereof. The writ petition is thus, held is to be without any merit and is dismissed. (MAHESH GROVER) October 18, 2011 JUDGE GD WHETHER TO BE REFERRED TO REPORTER? YES/NO