IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 10260 of 1992 Date of Decision: 10.03.2009 1. Tejinder Singh, Works Manager, Officiating General Manager, Punjab Roadways Depot, Ropar. 2. A.L. Klair, Traffic Manager, Officiating General Manager, Chandigarh Transport Undertaking, Depot No. 3, Chandigarh. ... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Punjab through Secretary to Govt. Punjab, Transport Department, Chandigarh Administration. 2. Arjan Singh, Assistant Divisional Manager (Purchase), Chandigarh Transport Undertaking, Chandigarh. 3. Sukhbir Singh, Assistant Mechanical Engineer, Punjab Roadways Depot, Nawanshahr, District Jalandhar. ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: None for the petitioners. Ms. Madhu Dayal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Shri Vipan Mahajan, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. * * * * HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The petitioners No. 1 and 2 are substantive Works Manager & Traffic Manager, working with Punjab Roadways. The petitioner No. 2 was directly recruited as Traffic Manager through the Punjab Public Service Commission. The next promotion from the post of Works Manager and Traffic Manager is that to the post of General Manager in terms of Punjab Department of Transport Commercial Wing (State Service Class-II), Rule 1984. The grievance of the petitioners is that 50 per cent of the posts of General Managers are required to be filled by direct recruitment; 25 per cent from amongst Traffic Managers and others and remaining 25 per cent by promotion amongst Works Manager and other categories. But respondent No. 2 and 3 have been promoted on adhoc basis as General Managers in violation of the rules as there is no promotion quota for the category to which respondent Nos. 2 and 3 belong i.e. Assistant Divisional Manager (Purchase) and Assistant Mechanical Engineer. In reply, it has been pointed out that the said respondents have been promoted on adhoc basis for six months basis to carry out and discharge the functions of General Manager against the quota meant for the direct recruits to meet out the emergent situation. No right of the petitioners is effected as no promotion has been effected detrimental to the rights of the petitioners. There is no interim order in the Writ Petition. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were promoted on adhoc basis for a short period of six months. The promotion was against the category to which petitioners are not the members. In view of the said fact, it cannot be said that any right of the petitioners has been violated. Thus, I do not find any merit in the present petition. The same is dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) 10.03.2009 JUDGE Amodh