Civil Writ Petition No. 2896 of 1991 --1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 2896 of 1991 Date of decision: 24.12.2010 Balwant Rai and others ..... Petitioners. Versus The State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. JEYAPAUL Present:- Mr. Surinder Dhull, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sukhwinder Singh Nara, Sr. DAG, Haryana for the respondent-State. None for the private respondents. M. Jeyapaul, J(Oral). The petitioners are working as Clerk in the department of Town and Country Planning, Haryana. Their service conditions are governed by the Haryana Town and Country Planning Department Ministerial (Group C) Service Rules, 1983 (for short the Rules) framed by the State of Haryana Town and Country Planning Department. The petitioners would contend that respondents 4 to 8, who merely served as Stenotypists without having put in service as Clerk, were promoted to the cadre of Assistant, ignoring Rule 7 of the said Rules. It is contended that as per Appendix B to the said Rules only those who have got two years of experience as Civil Writ Petition No. 2896 of 1991 --2-- Clerk in addition to 3 years of experience as Steno-typist and the Clerk who put in 3 years of experience as Clerk are eligible for promotion as Assistant but the 3rd respondent had ingeniously made a proposal for promotion of respondent nos. 4 to 8 with some certificate as though they had discharged clerical duties also when they were serving as Stenographers and the said proposal was approved by the higher authorities. Therefore, it is contended that the impugned order dated 22.02.2991 has been passed in violation of the said Rules. The petitioners, therefore, have prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 22.02.1991. 2. As the Counsel for respondent nos. 4 to 8 was elevated to the Bench of the High Court, fresh notices were ordered to be issued to them. The records would reflect that respondent nos. 4 to 8 have been served with notice, but they have chosen not to enter appearance through any counsel. Nor have they appeared in person. 3. The State has filed a reply supporting the promotion of respondent nos. 4 to 8 as Assistants from the cadre of Stenographer on the ground that they were seniors to the petitioners according to the inter se seniority list maintained by the department. It is submitted by the State that respondent nos. 4 to 8, who have been appointed as Stenographers have been discharging the clerical job also and therefore they were also eligible for promotion to the post of Civil Writ Petition No. 2896 of 1991 --3-- Assistant. It is lastly contended by the State that at the most a stenographer can be promoted to the Senior Scale Stenographer and Personal Assistant. As two posts of Senior Scale Stenographer and two posts of Personal Assistant alone are available for the stenographers to fit in on promotion, their chances of promotion in the department is very bleak. 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners drawing the attention of this Court to Rule 7 of the said Rules and Appendix B would submit that the stenographers, who have no experience of Clerk have been promoted ignoring the entitlement of the petitioners for promotion by virtue of their experience as Clerk . Therefore the impugned order is liable to be quashed, he would argue. 5. In contrast, the learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the respondent-State would submit that respondent nos. 4 to 8 being seniors in position as per inter se seniority list maintained by the department, have been rightly promoted as they were found to have been discharging the clerical duties also when they were serving as stenographers. Therefore, it is his submission that the impugned order dated 22.02.1991 has been rightly passed giving the promotion to respondent nos. 4 to 8. 6. There is no dispute to the fact that the service conditions of the petitioners as well as respondent nos. 4 to 8 are governed by the Haryana Town and Country Planning Civil Writ Petition No. 2896 of 1991 --4-- Department Ministerial (Group C) Service Rules, 1983. Rule 7 of the said Rules prescribes that no person shall be appointed to the service unless he is in possession of academic qualifications and experience specified in column 2 of 'Appendix B' to these rules in the case of direct recruitment and those specified in column 3 of the aforesaid Appendix in the case of recruitment other than by direct recruitment. As far as the post of the Assistant is concerned, the only source of recruitment is by way of promotion. Rule 9(1)(e) of the said Rules would read that the post of Assistant shall be filled by promotion from amongst Clerks or Junior Scale Stenographers or Steno-typists. 7. What is the experience required for the post of Assistant from the eligible Clerks and Steno-typists has been stated in 'Appendix B' to the Rules. As per the said 'Appendix B', the Clerks, Stenotypists or Junior Scale Stenographers, who have got three years of experience in their position are eligible for promotion to the cadre of Assistant. As far as the Steno- typists and Junior Scale Stenographers are concerned, a further experience of two years as Clerk also has been mandated under 'Appendix B'. 8. Respondent nos. 4 to 8 have been promoted just on the basis of certificates issued by the District Town Planner/ Assistant Town Planner of the respective stations to the effect that they also performed the duties as Clerks in addition to their Civil Writ Petition No. 2896 of 1991 --5-- normal duties as Steno-typists. 9. As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, if the steno-typists are in fact discharging the duties of the Clerks also, there would not have been any necessity to incorporate a rider as far as Steno-typist or Junior Scale Stenographer is concerned in Appendix B while prescribing experience for promotion to the cadre of Assistant. At any rate it is found that the very nature of the job of the steno-typist involves some clerical duties also. But as per the Rule prescribed under Appendix B to the Rules, distinct experience as Clerk for 2 years in case of Steno-typist or Junior Scale Stenographer is required, in addition to the experience as Steno-typist or Junior Scale Stenographer for three years. Therefore the duty performed by the Stenographer as a Clerk to their main function, cannot be counted as a distinct Clerk experience for the purpose of promotion as Assistant in terms of 'Appendix B'. 10. As per the inter se seniority list maintained by the State, respondent nos. 4 to 8 might have been seniors to the petitiones but when the experience as prescribed under 'Appendix B' had not been gained by the stenographers having served exclusively as Clerk on posting, they are not entitled to claim promotion as Assistants as per the strict interpretation of 'Appendix B'. Civil Writ Petition No. 2896 of 1991 --6-- 11. It is true that the promotional avenue for Junior Scale Stenographers and steno-typists is found to be bleak as it is brought to the notice of the Court that there are only four promotional posts namely two posts of Senior Scale Stenographers and two posts of Personal Assistants are available for the steno-typists and Junior Scale Stenographers. Having framed such strict Rules as regards the experience required for the steno-typists and Junior Scale Stenographers to claim promotion, the State should have adhered to those Rules and promoted only those persons who were eligible for the promotion as per the experience prescribed under the Rules. The State is not supposed to arbitrarily lay down a proposition that the Stenographers by virtue of their position discharge clerical duties also and that no distinct experience as Clerk is required. 12. The only option left for the State is to amend suitably Appendix B with respect to the experience prescribed for the Steno-typist and Junior Scale Stenographers to claim promotion for the post of Assistants. The State has a solid ground for amending the said Rules, considering the fact that the chances of promotion of the steno-typist and Junior Scale Stenographer is totally bleak and that the State is put in an embarrassing position to promote even the far juniors to the posts of Assistant just because they served as Clerks. Further Civil Writ Petition No. 2896 of 1991 --7-- as per the contention of the State, the Steno-typists and Junior Scale Stenographers are also performing a part of the duties of the Clerk. In my considered view no special expertise is required to hold the position of Assistant. A Clerk or a Steno-typist or a Junior Scale Stenographer, who have put in about 3 years of experience could effectively man the post of Assistant. Therefore, if it deems fit can go in for amendment of the experience prescribed specifically for Steno-typist or Junior Scale Stenographers for promotion to the post of Assistant under Appendix B to the Rules. But at any rate, as per the existing Rules, the State has arbitrarily acted and promoted respondent nos. 4 to 8, who are Steno-typists/Junior Scale Stenographers to the post of Assistants when they had not gained distinct experience of two years as Clerk. 13. In view of the above, the impugned order passed by 2nd respondent with regard to the promotion granted to respondent nos. 4 to 8 stands quashed and respondent nos. 1 to 3 are directed to make promotion to the posts of Assistant strictly in accordance with the Haryana Town and Country Planning Department Ministerial (Group C) Service Rules, 1983 until it is suitably amended as suggested in this judgment. Civil Writ Petition No. 2896 of 1991 --8-- 14. With the above directions, the writ petition stands allowed. There is no order as to costs. (M. Jeyapaul) Judge 24.12.2010 dinesh Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? (Yes/No)