IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 5149 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : 31.03.2009 Mange Ram .... PETITIONER Versus The Financial Commissioner & Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Chandigarh and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. S.S. Dalal, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. The petitioner joined the services of the Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board (hereinafter referred to as `the respondent Board') on 10.3.1970 as Assistant Secretary, Enforcement Officer-cum- Secretary. Thereafter, he was promoted as District Marketing Enforcement Officer on 10.4.1998. After his promotion, respondents No.4 and 5, namely Ram Niwas Sharma and Prit Pal Singh, were promoted as District Marketing Enforcement Officers on 18.6.2002. The services of the petitioner were regularised on the post of District Marketing Enforcement Officer with effect from 1.7.2003, whereas the services of respondents No.4 and 5 were regularised on the said post with effect from 1.4.2004. The CWP No. 5149 of 2009 -2- petitioner retired from service on 31.3.2006, after attaining the age of superannuation. Now, it is the case of the petitioner that vide order dated 21.4.2006 (Annexure P-3), respondents No.4 and 5 have been promoted to the post of Zonal Marketing Enforcement Officer with retrospective effect i.e. from 21.7.2005, while ignoring the rightful claim of the petitioner, who was senior to both of them. The petitioner is further praying for quashing of the order dated 31.1.2008 (Annexure P-6), whereby the Chief Administrator of the respondent Board has rejected the claim of the petitioner for his notional promotion with effect from 20.4.2001 as well as the order dated 24.6.2008 (Annexure P-8), passed by the Financial Commissioner & Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Agriculture Department, whereby the appeal of the petitioner against the said order of the Chief Administrator has been dismissed. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the impugned orders. A perusal of the impugned order Annexure P-6 reveals that S/Shri Randhir Singh and M.S. Chhokar, who were senior to the petitioner, were promoted to the post of Zonal Marketing Enforcement Officer with effect from 21.7.2005. This order further reveals that respondents No.4 and 5, who were junior to the petitioner, were also promoted to the said post with effect from 21.7.2005. It is further stated in the order that on receipt of the representation of the petitioner, he was also ordered to be promoted as CWP No. 5149 of 2009 -3- Zonal Marketing Enforcement Officer from the date his juniors were promoted i.e. from 21.7.2005. These facts have not been disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. However, he submits that the petitioner is entitled to be promoted on the aforesaid post with effect from 20.4.2001, because on that day, he was fully eligible for promotion. Therefore, the petitioner should have been notionally promoted with effect from the said date. I do not find any force in this submission of learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner might have been fulfilling the requisite experience of three years as District Marketing Enforcement Officer on 20.4.2001, which was required for promotion to the post of Zonal Marketing Enforcement Officer, but actually even the seniors of the petitioner were not promoted on that day. The petitioner never raised any grouse while he was in service and he stood retired on 31.3.2006. By that time, even his seniors were not promoted. Since vide order dated 21.4.2006 (Annexure P-3), the juniors of the petitioner were promoted with effect from 21.7.2005, therefore, the petitioner was also given notional promotion from the said date. Thus, in my opinion, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed in the petition i.e. for issuing direction to the respondents to give him notional promotion with effect from 20.4.2001, when he became eligible and qualified to be promoted to the higher post. Dismissed. March 31, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE