CWP No.13817 of 2000 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.13817 of 2000 Date of Decision: 14.09.2010 Krishan Singh & Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana & Ors. ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA Present: Mr.Rakesh Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Rajiv K.Takkar, Addl.A.G., Haryana, for the respondents. --- Vinod K.Sharma,J. (Oral) The petitioners by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this court have prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the instructions issued by the Financial Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Haryana, Revenue Department stipulating therein as under:- “i) Permanent Kanungos may be allowed to appear in the departmental examination of the Naib Tehsildars and may be given maximum three chances. The availing of these chances CWP No.13817 of 2000 2 would, however, not debar them from availing further chances of passing the examination under standing order No.12 after their promotion as Naib Tehsildar indue course. Further only those permanent Kanungos would be allowed to take this examination whose names are recommended by the Deputy Commissioners through the Commissioners. ii) The passing of the departmental examination by permanent Kanungos would not give them any right or privilege to claim out of turn promotion as Naib Tehsildar merely on the basis of having passed the examination. The promotion rules would remain unchanged and Kanungos would continue to be promoted as Naib Tehsildar on the basis of seniority-cum-merit irrespective of the fact whether they have as a Kanungo passed the Naib Tehsaildar Examination or not.” The petitioners challenged the instructions on the ground, that these instructions go contrary to Haryana Revenue Department, Naib Tehsildar (Group-C) Service Rules 1988 (for short the Rules), as according to Rule 7, all promotions are required to be made on seniority-cum-merit basis, though seniority alone does not confer any right to promotion. Rules 7 & 9 of the Rules reads as under:- “7. Qualifications: No person shall be appointed to any post in the Service, unless he is in possession of qualifications and experience specified in column 3 of Appendix B to these rules in the case of direct recruitment and those specified in CWP No.13817 of 2000 3 column 4 of the aforesaid Appendix in the case of appointment other than by direct recruitment. Appendix B relating to Rule 7 is as under: Sr.No. 1 Designation of post 2 Academic qualifications and experience, if any, for direct recruitment 3 Academic qualification and experience, if any, for appointment other than by direct Recruitment 4 Niab- (I) Graduate of a recognized University (ii) Knowledge of Hindi upto Matric standard By promotion (I) Matric or equivalent or a recognized University or Board (ii) Knowledge of Hindu Upto Matric standard. (iii) Five years experience as Kanungo, District revenue Accountant or Senior Revenue Accountant of Financial Commissioner Office, Haryana. (iv) Five years experience on a post involving the performance of duties of the nature similar to the duties performed by the Niab Tehsildars governed under these rules. Rule 9.Method of Recruitment. (1) Recruitment to the post of Niab Tehsildar shall be made in the following manner: (a) 50% by direct recruitment; and (b) 50% by promotion from amongst Kanungos, District revenue Accountants or Senior Revenue Accountants of CWP No.13817 of 2000 4 Financial Commissioner's Office; or (c) by transfer or deputation of an official already in the service of any State Government or the Government of India. (2) All promotions shall be made on seniority cum merit basis and seniority alone shall not confer any right to such promotions.” The question will be only academic as preliminary objection has been raised in the written statement, that the writ petition suffers from a vice of non-joinder of necessary parties. The petitioners have chosen not to implead the persons given benefit under these instructions and whose rights will be materially affected in case the writ petition is accepted. No adverse order can be passed against party who is not before the court. The petitioners, after the filing of the written statement, amended the writ petition but again chose not to implead the necessary parties. In the absence of necessary parties no relief can be granted to the petitioners. While leaving the question open as to whether the impugned instructions can be sustained in law or not, this writ petition is ordered to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties. No costs. (Vinod K.Sharma) 14.09.2010 Judge rp