IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.11247 of 1992 Date of Decision : March 22, 2010. Parshotam Singh .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Naveen Batra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.B.S.Chahal, DAG, Punjab. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) In this civil writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 28.7.1992 (Annexure P-9) whereby he has been reverted from the post of Junior Draftsman to the post of Azo Operator. The petitioner possesses academic qualification of matriculation with diploma from I.T.I. in Surveyor Trade. On the basis of said qualification, he was appointed as Ferro Khalasi in the Amritsar Drainage Circle, Amritsar on 1.6.1983. The said post was later on re- designated as Azo Operator vide office order dated 22.3.1989 (Annexure P-2). The services of the petitioner were regularized as Azo Operator vide order dated 21.12.1990 (Annexure P-3). Meanwhile, the petitioner C.W.P.No .11247 of 1992 2 improved his qualification and passed papers `A' & `B' (Civil and Mechanical) of the Departmental Examination of Tracers/Draftsmen vide certificates dated 11.2.1992 and 31.7.1991 (Annexures P-4 & P-5), respectively. On the basis of said newly acquired qualification, the petitioner was promoted against the vacant post of Junior Draftsman vide order dated 13.5.1992 (Annexure P-6). The petitioner, however, could hardly work on the promotional post for a month or so when he was slapped with the reversion order dated 28.7.1992 (Annexure P-9) whereby, without assigning any reason whatsoever, his promotion order was withdrawn and he was directed to be deputed on the original post of Azo Operator. Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court. It may be noticed here that while issuing notice of motion, a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.8.1992, stayed reversion of the petitioner. Resultantly, the petitioner is still working on the promotional post of Junior Draftsman. In their counter-affidavit, the respondents have come with the plea that the petitioner was not qualified for the post of Junior Draftsman nor an Azo Operator could be promoted to the post of Junior Draftsman. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and perused the records. In my considered view, both the pleas taken by the respondents cannot sustain. It is the pleaded case of the respondents that for appointment to the post of Tracers (re-designated as Junior Draftsman), C.W.P.No .11247 of 1992 3 the qualification prescribed under the Punjab Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Draftsman and Tracers State Service, Class-III Rules, 1960, is as follows:- “Rule-10: (d) in the case of Tracers; (i) by promotion of temporary Tracer in the Circle concerned and (ii) If no suitable person is available, from amongst temporary Tracers in other circle, provided they have qualified in the examination prescribed for this purpose.” It, thus, appears that no academic qualification has been prescribed for the post of Tracer. Contrary to it, the petitioner had passed papers `A' & `B' (Civil and Mechanical) of the Departmental Examination of Tracers/Draftsmen before he was promoted as Junior Draftsman. The petitioner cannot, therefore, be termed as ineligible for want of qualification(s). So far as the non-prescription of promotional avenues from the post of Azo Operator to Junior Draftsman is concerned, suffice it to observe that the respondents took a conscious decision to promote the petitioner may be in order to award him for his improved qualifications. Be that as it may, the petitioner is working on the said promotional post for the last 18 years. It will cause extreme hardship in case the petitioner is ordered to be revered at this stage. The reversion order cannot sustain also being totally cryptic and lacunic. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed; the impugned order dated 28.7.1992 (Annexure P-9) is quashed and the C.W.P.No .11247 of 1992 4 petitioner is held entitled to hold the post of Junior Draftsman and he shall be entitled for all the consequential service benefits including the ACP on the said post. The needful shall be done within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. It is, however, clarified that in view of the fact that the petitioner was promoted on the basis of higher qualification acquired by him, his promotion cannot be taken as a binding precedent. Dasti. March 22, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE