IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA C.W.P.-T - No. 1774 of 2008 Date of decision: 13. 8. 2010 Raj Kumar …..Petitioner Versus H.P. University and others ……Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 . For the petitioner: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate, for respondents N. 1 and 2. Surinder Singh, J (oral). The petitioner has sought the following reliefs: (a) That respondents 1 and 2 be directed to appoint/promote the petitioner as Jr. Scale Stenographer with retrospective effect from the date of becoming eligible to hold that post and he be granted all past and future benefits and emoluments from such date. (b) That the appointment/promotion of respondents 3 to 6 be quashed as being contrary to Rules. (C ) That the petitioner be declared to be senior to respondents 3 to 6 in 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. yes. - 2 - accordance with the Recruitment & Promotion Rules, 1973. (d) That letters dated 10.3.2000 (Annexure PM), 23.1.2001 (Annexure PN), Memo dated 28.8.2001 (Annexure PS), Notifications dated 16.3.2002 (Annexure PV) and (PW) Memos dated 6.7.2002 (Annexure PZ) and (Annexure PAA) , and office order dated 9.7.2002 (Annexure PBB) may kindly be quashed and set aside on the ground of being violative of the prescribed rules as well as the Fundamental and legal rights of the petitioner and being arbitrary and tainted with malafides. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record. 3. Facts in brief can be stated thus. In the year 1996, respondent-University made requisition to the Employment Exchanges in the District to fill-up the post of Steno-typist (English)/Junior Scale Stenographers. Pursuant to this, name of the petitioner was sponsored by the employment Exchange, Shimla for the aforesaid posts. Respondent-University issued a letter Annexure PA dated 19.6.1996 whereby the petitioner was required to report for short-hand/typing- - 3 - test for the said post on 27.7.1996 at 1 p.m. in the Lecture Hall of ICDEOL. A common test was held for both these posts wherein the petitioner along with private respondents appeared. It is worthwhile to state here that in 1973 Recruitment and Promotion Rules, the post of Steno-typist was non-existent but the post of Junior Scale Stenographer did exist. 4. The stand of the Respondent- University is that in the above joint test, only respondent No. 3 Sushma Rohal could qulify the test but the petitioner and others could not attain the requisite speed as such she was appointed as Junior Scale Stenographer on regular basis, whereas petitioner along with others was appointed as Steno-Typist on ad hoc basis with the stipulation that he will have to qualify the short-hand/typing test as prescribed in the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973. 5. Petitioner joined his duties on 28.12.1986. Thereafter he along with other resisted the appointment of respondent No. 3 as Junior Scale - 4 - Stenographer, as such respondent- University directed them to sit in the short-hand/typing test (English) with the requisite speed of 80/40 w.p.m. respectively (Annexure PE dated 13.5.1997). Petitioner and respondent No. 4 Kabul Singh along with other appeared in the said test but out of this lot, only respondent No. 4 could qualify the test as such he was appointed as Junior Scale Stenographer. 6. Vide letter Annexure PF dated 19.3.1998, petitioner and others Junior Scale Stenographers as well as Steno- typist who had not cleared the short- hand/typing test were required to appear for the test on 19.3.198 with requisite speed of 80/40 w.p.m. respectively. 7. Vide letter No. 7-4/82/HPU/Estt. (Annexure PG) dated 17.7.1998, only the petitioner, who was the Steno Typist, qualified the test with the requisite speed prescribed under the Rules. Accordingly ad hoc service of the petitioner as Steno-typist was regularized w.e.f. 31.3.1998 which was conveyed to him - 5 - vide letter Annexure PH dated 6.10.1998. It reads as under:- “HIMACHAL PRADESH UNIVERSITY ESTABLISHMENT BRANCH No. 7-4/82-HPU (Estt.) Summer Hill, Shimla-5 Dated. OFFICE ORDER The Vice-Chancellor has been pleased to regularize the ad hoc services of Shri Raj Kumar, Steno-Typist with effect from 31.3.1998 consequent upon fulfillment of eligibility condition imposed upon him vide appointment letter of even number dated 24.12.1996. On regularization his services, Shri Raj Kumar, Steno-Typist will be on probation for a period of one year from the date of appointment which can be extended by another year under the rules. Other terms and conditions of initial appointment will remain unchanged. (K.P. Doger), Deputy Registrar (Estt.) Endst. No. Even: Dated: 6.10.1998” 8. The copies were endorsed to the petitioner and other officers concerned. 9. Thus the letter aforesaid makes it absolutely clear that the petitioner had fulfilled the requisite condition of qualifying short-hand and type test as - 6 - contained in letter of his initial appointment Annexure PB, dated 29.12.1996 and he was kept on probation for a period of one year from the date of such appointment which was liable to be extended for another one year, as per rules. Other terms and conditions of the initial appointment remained unchanged. 10. The petitioner completed three years on 30.3.2001 as Steno-Typist from the date of his appointment. There is nothing on record to show that his probation period was extended thus it is deemed to have been successfully completed on the completion of one year. 11. On 14.1.2000 respondent-University published a notice inviting applications for six vacancies (General) promotional post in the cadre of Junior Scale Stenographer in the pay scale of Rs.4400- 7000 plus usual allowances to be filled up by way of promotion out of the cadre of Steno-Typist who had qualified the technical qualifications prescribed under Rule 14.3 of the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973. - 7 - 12. Vide Annexure P1, the petitioner informed the Registrar H.P. university that he had passed the short-hand/typing test and was made regular therefore, he be considered for the post of Junior Scale Stenographer. 13. On 16.1.2000 vide Annexure PK petitioner had shown his willingness to sit in the said test which was scheduled to be held on 15.3.2000 but vide letter Annexure PM dated 23.1.2001 he was informed that he was not eligible as he fell short of eligibility condition of three years of approved service. Thereafter the petitioner made representation Annexure PN dated 23.1.2001 followed by other representations dated 27.1.2001 and 27.4.2001 which were not replied by the respondent-University. 14. Again on 19.5.2001 respondents No. 1 and 2 notified vacancies for the post of Junior Scale Stenographers. The petitioner was required vide letter Annexure PR dated 4.8.2001 to appear again in the short-hand/typing test on 21.8.2001, Although he had already qualified the - 8 - requisite test in short-hand and type writing as per office order Annexure PH reproduced above. He was the only candidate who again appeared in the test and later he was informed that he could not qualify the said test with requisite speed and he was given another date to appear in the test in the month of January, 2002. 15. Record also reveals that Kabul Singh had qualified the test of Steno- Typist in November, 1997 whereas petitioner qualified the similar test in the year 1998 (Annexure PH) but Kabul Singh was promoted as Junior Scale Stenographer without any such requirement of his appearing in the test again then why the stipulation was imposed upon the petitioner is not known. Further the record does not show whether Sushma Rohal (Respondent No.3) had qualified the typing test or not. The proceedings recorded by the Recruitment and Promotion Committee only says about qualifying the test in short-hand not typing qua her. In so far as Soma and Sunita respondents are concerned they had qualified similar test - 9 - as was qualified by the petitioner they were promoted as Junior Scale Stenographers without further such test. 16. The petitioner had also made a detailed representation to the Vice Chancellor of the respondent-University with a copy endorsed to the Registrar, precisely on the ground that respondents No. 5 and 6 aforesaid were doing only the Diary Dispatch work right from the very beginning when they were appointed and were not competent in typing and stenography. He offered to sit in the test along with respondents No. 5 and 6 provided the test is conducted by an independent Agency to show his worth. The matter hanged in fire for sometime, ultimately his representation was rejected without assigning any cogent reason. It is not understood why a step-motherly treatment was meted out to him. Even an addendum was issued on 6.7.2002 reducing the prescribed speed for the short-hand and type writing in respect of the test held on 31.3.1998 from 80/60 w.p.m. to 40/20 w.p.m. Needless to say the petitioner had already qualified this test - 10 - with the requisite speed, as stated above which was in vogue at that time. The record also reveals that the petitioner was not incompetent to perform the duties assigned to him. Vide Annexure P-BB dated 9.7.2002 petitioner in his capacity as Steno Typist was posted with the Deputy Registrar (Estt.) and he was also ordered to attend the stenography duty with Store Purchase Officer in addition to his own duties. However, if he was not a competent Stenographer, he would not have been given the dual charge for the said purpose, nor the University has said anything in their reply regarding his capabilities. 17. It appears that respondent- University was short of Junior Scale Stenographer. As per Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973 the posts of the Junior Scale Stenographers were to be filled up from the category (a) Steno- typist (b) Clerk/Typist/Catalogue Typist, (c) Any other equivalent post having three years of service with requisite qualification of approved service under Rule 14.3 of the said Rules with a speed - 11 - of 80/40 w.p.m. in short-hand and stenographer (English) respectively. 18. On 11th July, 2002, (Annexure PCC) respondent-University invited applications for the vacancy in the Junior Scale Stenographer under promotion quota. The candidates from the feeder category aforesaid, who were willing to be considered for promotion to the said post, were required to exercise their option by 22.7.2002. The petitioner was apprehensive that he would again be ignored and others would be promoted, hence he filed Civil writ petition in this Court which was later transferred to the Erstwhile Tribunal and after the abolition of the Tribunal it was again transferred to this Court and now it has been registered as CWP-T (the present petition). 19. In the background of the above facts when the petitioner was regularized as Steno-typist on 31.3.1998 after clearing the requisite speed in short-hand and type writing and also that he had completed requisite service of three years on 30.3.2001, he fell within the - 12 - eligibility criteria for promotion to the post of Junior Scale Stenographer. When no other candidate was required to sit in the short-hand and type-writing test for the promotion of the Junior Scale Stenographer/Sr. Scale Stenographer and so on then one fails to understand as to why the respondent-University insisted upon the petitioner alone to sit again in the said test before being considered for promotion. Whereas Rule 10.10 of the R & P Rules, 1973 provides that on completion of the requisite service of three yeas as Steno-Typist the incumbent can be promoted as Junior Scale Stenographer provided that a candidate with lesser speed may also be appointed, if no candidate with minimum prescribed speed is available, subject to the condition that the appointee with lesser initial speed shall not be confirmed unless he acquires within three years after appointment, the minimum speed prescribed. 20. Part III of the said Rules also lays down merit criteria for the promotion to the various posts including the Junior Scale Stenographer which provided minimum - 13 - length of three years approved service which also inter alia provides the technical qualification for the short-hand and typing is 80/40 w.p.m. based upon the test. 21. The harmonious reading of the above provisions of the Rules shows that the persons from the feeder category can be promoted provided incumbent has requisite approved service in the feeder cadre and he may be allowed to qualify the short- hand and typing test within a period of three years, but he would not be confirmed as aforesaid. 22. The learned counsel for the petitioner made the submission that in the year 1996, at the time of initial appointment the petitioner was nearer to the Bench Mark in short-hand and typing test and was entitled to be appointed as Junior Scale Stenographer under Rule 10.10 of the 1973 rules as was done in the case of Sushma Rohal. This contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be acceded to, at this stage, for the reasons that he accepted the appointment - 14 - as steno-typist. It was only Sushma Rohal as per the reply of respondent-University, who could qualify the test although there is no mention that she had also qualified the typing-test, but it is assumed that she must have qualified the typing test with requisite speed therefore, the other conditions were segregated and given the appointment of Steno-typist on ad hoc basis subject to their qualifying the requisite speed, to which the petitioner agreed and participated in test so held. 23. Therefore, in view of the above, the petitioner had completed the requisite service of three years as Steno Typist on 30.3.2001 therefore, he was eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Junior Scale Stenographer. Thus it is ordered that respondent-University shall consider the case of the petitioner, in view of the observations made hereinabove, and if nothing is adverse against him, he be promoted to the post of Junior Scale Stenographer with all consequential benefits against the vacancy, failing which, respondents may create a supernumerary post. - 15 - 24. In view of above, other reliefs not pressed. The matter stands disposed of along with pending application(s) if any. Record of the respondent University be returned. August 13, 2010 (Surinder Singh, J (cm) - 16 -