IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 5908 of 2008 ( OA 1886/99) Date of Decision : May 17, 2010 Sh. Kalam Singh Gazta Petitioner Versus The Lokayukta, Himachal Pradesh, through its Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Shimla-2. Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. P. P. Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner. For the respondent : R. M. Bisht, Dy. Advocate General and Mr. P. M. Negi, Dy. Advocate General, for the respondent/State. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) The petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- “(i) That the impugned Annexure A-3, dated 19th April, 1999 may be quashed and set aside; (ii) That the respondent may be directed to consider the applicant’s promotion as Sr. Assistant w.e.f. the date Sh. Dalip Singh had been handed over the additional charge of the post of Section Officer; (iii) That the applicant may be considered held entitled to seniority as Sr. Assistant w.e.f. 1994 with all consequential benefits like increments, seniority, promotion etc; Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 (iv) That arrears accruing to the applicant after considering his promotion w.e.f. 1994 may also be granted to the applicant alongwith interest @ 18% per annum; (v) Any other relief deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the applicant.” 2. It is not in dispute that the Rules for the post of Section Officer in the office of the Lokayukta were notified on 27.11.1993. Post of Section Officer fell vacant on 30.6.1994. As on this date petitioner was working as a Junior Assistant. In terms of the said Rules the post of Section Officer was to be filled up by the Senior Assistants by promotion and the post of Senior Assistant was to be filled up by promotion by the Junior Assistants. 3. On 30.6.1994 Sh. Dalip Singh who was officiating as a Senior Assistant was given the additional charge of Section Officer. Undisputedly he was promoted on regular basis as Section Officer only in the year 1996 and the resultant vacancy of a Senior Assistant was filled up by the present petitioner who was promoted from the post of Junior Assistant. 4. It is the petitioner’s grievance that his chances of promotion from the post of Junior Assistant to the post of Senior Assistant was blocked due to handing over additional charge to Sh. Dalip Singh from the year 1994 up to 1996. 5. In the petition the petitioner has not alleged any mala fides. The respondents in their reply have categorically stated as under:- 3 “(iii) Admitted to the extent that the R & P Rules for the post of Section Officer (Class II Gazetted) in the office of the Lokayukta were Notified on 27.11.1993 and were published in extra-ordinary Gazette dated 14.12.93. It may be mentioned that on the creation of this office two channels of promotion were available to the Senior Assistants viz. to the post of Reader (Gazetted) & Section Officer. While the R & P Rules for the post of Section Officer were notified by the Government on 27.11.93, the R & P Rules for the post of Reader (Class II Gazetted) could not be finalised and notified by the Govt. till 3.10.1996. As such, no regular promotion to the post of Reader could have been made till the finalisation of the R & P Rules. The post of Reader carried a special pay of Rs. 300/- whereas the post of Section Officer carried special pay of Rs. 200/- only in addition to the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000 in respect of both the posts. The following were the two senior most Sr. Assistants at that time in this office:- S/Shri 1. A. K. Mohindru 2. Daleep Singh Keeping in view the higher special pay attached with the post of Reader the incumbent at Sr. No. 1 opted for promotion to the post of Reader (Class II Gazetted). However the R & P Rules for the post of Reader were finalised and notified by the Govt. vide Notification No. LOKA-2(B)2-3/94 dated 26.11.1996 (R-II) and immediately thereafter i.e. on 26.11.1996 the post of Reader was filed up. After filling up the post of Reader 4 (Class II Gazetted) the post of Section Officer was filed-up on regular basis vide Notification No. LOKA-2(B)2-3/94 dated 26.11.1996 (R-III). It was necessary in public interest and in order to run the office/administration smoothly to entrust the charge of the posts of Reader and Section Officer to the senior most Senior Assistants under the provision of FR-49. It is emphatically denied that the orders of the competent authority for continuance of the arrangement beyond the period of 3 months were not obtained. In this behalf, approval of Hon’ble Lokayukta was obtained.” 6. In my considered view the respondent/State has clearly justified the reason for not promoting Sh. Dalip Singh on regular basis w.e.f. 1994 itself. 7. In any event petitioner has got no right in law for claiming promotion to a post from the date on which it actually fell vacant. No doubt there is circular dated 29.8.1988 clarifying F.R. 49 that additional charge of a post is not to be given for a period exceeding three months but however this by itself would not automatically entitle the petitioner for a right to be promoted. At best, this circular can be pressed to deprive Sh. Dalip Singh from the emoluments which he had received for the period he had held additional charge. But that is not under challenge here. 8. My attention has also been invited to the provisions of Clause 6.2 of Chapter VI of the Himachal Pradesh Financial Rules, 1971 5 (Volume-I). This simply deals with the payment of emoluments to the employees. This also would not confer any right upon the petitioner to seek promotion from the date from which the post of a Section Officer had fallen vacant. 9. No legally enforceable right of the petitioner stands violated. Hence the present petition stands dismissed. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. May 17, 2010 (PK)