IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 8449 of 2010 Date of Decision: 15.9.2011 Andeep Rana and others …Petitioners. Versus. H.P. Subordinate Services Selection Board … Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting? Yes. For the Petitioners: Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. Deepak Gupta, J (oral) 1. By means of this petition, the petitioners, who are working as Junior Assistants in the H.P. Subordinate Services Selection Board, have prayed that the service rendered by them in different Government departments before their absorption in the Board should be counted for reckoning the service rendered in the grade for the purpose of promotion. 2. As per the rules framed by the respondent- board, appointment to the post of Senior Assistant is made 100% by promotion failing which by transfer on secondment basis. The relevant portion of the 2 rules as amended on 24th December, 2003 reads as follows:- “(i) By promotion from amongst the common clerical cadre of Clerks/Junior Assistants who possesses ten years’ regular service or regular combined with continuous adhoc service, if any, in the grade failing which by transfer on secondment basis from amongst the incumbents of this post working in the identical pay scale of this post from the Himachal Pradesh Secretariat/HP Public Service Commission/ Other H.P. Government Departments; Provided that those Clerks who have been promoted from amongst the Class IV employees or appointed on compassionate grounds having the educational qualification Matric pass of Matric in English only and Hindi Rattan pass at the time of such promotion/appointment shall not be promoted to the post of Senior Assistant unless they possess the educational qualification viz Matric 2nd Division or 10+2 pass or prescribed for direct recruitment.” 3. The undisputed facts are that on their absorption in the Board the petitioners have been given the benefit of their past service for the purpose of seniority, etc. but the Board is not taking into consideration their past service for the purpose of considering them for promotion. The stand of the Board is that it sought a clarification from the State Government and the State Government vide its letter dated 30th March, 2001 directed that only the service 3 rendered from the date of absorption in the Board shall be counted for the purpose of promotion. 4. In any case, where the Court is called upon to interpret rules, the interpretation must be one which is in consonance with Article 14 of the Constitution of India and in accordance with the well settled principles of service jurisprudence. In case the interpretation given by the State to the Board is accepted it will lead to a highly anomalous situation. A person who has rendered 7 years service in the Board and may have rendered 10 years service prior to that in the Government department will not be considered eligible for promotion but an employee of the Government department who has just rendered 10 years service will be eligible to be posted on transfer on secondment basis to the said post. 5. The petitioners were all serving in different departments when they were sent on secondment/deputation to the H.P. Subordinate Services Selection Board when the same was created. Thereafter their services were absorbed in the board. They had already put in substantial service in the parent departments and if they had continued in their parent departments they may have been promoted by this time. As per the amended rules a Junior Assistant who has put in 10 4 years regular service or regular combined with continuous adhoc service in the grade is eligible for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant and in case no such candidates are available then the post of Senior Assistant shall be filled in on secondment basis from amongst incumbents holding the post of Junior Assistant in the identical pay scale in the H.P. Secretariat, H.P.Public Service Commission or other public departments. The grievance of the petitioners is that their service rendered in the departments prior to their absorption in the Board cannot be just washed away. 6. In my view there is merit in the contention of the petitioners. It is indeed astounding and shocking that as per the stand of the Board based on annexure R-3 previous service rendered in other departments by the employees of the Board cannot be taken into consideration while considering them for promotion but if candidates in the Board are not available then the services rendered by the people who are not employees of the Board but employees of other departments can be taken into consideration. This is clearly invidious and arbitrary discrimination and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. There is no difference in the service rendered by the petitioners in other government 5 departments, H.P. Secretariat, H.P.Public Service Commission or their counterparts who are not employees of the Board but are working in the said department(s). Therefore, the service rendered by the petitioners in the grade of Junior Assistant in other departments prior to their absorption in the Board has to be taken into consideration while considering them for promotion. 7. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition is allowed and the respondent-Board is directed to count the service rendered by the petitioners in the grade in other departments prior to their absorption in the Board for the purpose of promotion also. Needful be done latest by 31st December, 2011. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. The petitioners shall be considered for promotion as and when the post(s) fell vacant and if found eligible shall be promoted with all consequential benefits. In case any monetary benefits are due and payable to the petitioners those shall be paid to them latest by 28th February, 2012 failing which the Board shall be liable to pay interest @ 12 % per annum from the date when the amount fell due. No costs. 15th September, 2011. ( Deepak Gupta ) ™ Judge.