CWP No. 1827 of 1990 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 1827 of 1990 Date of Decision : 08.02.2011 Tarlok Singh .... PETITIONER Vs. State of Haryana .... RESPONDENT CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH * * * Present : Mr. R.K.Malik, Sr. Advocate, with Mr.Krishan Kumar Chahal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Randhir Singh, Addl. A.G.Haryana. * * * RANJAN GOGOI, ACJ. (ORAL) The petitioner, who is a diploma holder, was appointed as a Junior Engineer (Horticulture) on 15.01.1962. He was promoted to the post of Sub-Divisional Engineer on 27.09.1971 in which post he was regularized by order dated 11.02.1972. At this stage, it may be taken note of that after creation of States of Punjab and Haryana w.e.f. 01.01.1966, the petitioner had opted for service in the State of Haryana and he was promoted to the post of Sub-Divisional Engineer in the Horticulture Department of the said State from where he had retired. CWP No. 1827 of 1990 2 The service conditions of employees like the petitioner were governed by the Punjab Services of Engineers Class-I PWD (Buildings and Roads Branch) Rules,1960. The said Rules were also applicable in the State of Haryana also. Under the aforesaid rules, a diploma holder Sub- Divisional Engineer was entitled for consideration for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. In the year 1989, the service rules were amended/promulgated afresh in terms of which a diploma holder was no longer eligible for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. The validity of the aforesaid rules was challenged by means of the present writ petition. During the pendency of the writ petition, a person junior to the petitioner, who was a degree holder, was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer in the year 1991. The said promotion has also been challenged in the present writ petition. There is no vested right to be promoted. The conditions of eligibility for promotion, therefore, can be altered by an employer State in the light of the experience gathered by it from the operation of such earlier rules as may have been in force. The law that has crystalized would warrant an opinion that only a vested right, which has already accrued, cannot be taken away by a subsequent change of law. There being no right to be promoted and a Government servant being only entitled to be considered for promotion, it cannot be said that the 1989 Rules, which introduced a new condition of eligibility, are legally unsustainable being offensive either of any of the rights granted to the petitioner by Part-III of the Constitution or having infringed the rights already earned under the earlier law i.e. Rules of 1960. The petitioner could not also have been promoted at the time when such promotion was conferred to his junior in service as he was not eligible under the extant laws. If that be so, we do CWP No. 1827 of 1990 3 not see how he would be entitled to any claim for notional promotion which is the only relief that may be otherwise due to the petitioner as he has retired in the meantime. The provisions of the 1989 Rules, as already held by us not being in any way invalid or legally fragile, we have no option but to decline the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. The writ petition shall stand accordingly dismissed. ( RANJAN GOGOI) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE February 08, 2011 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) pj JUDGE