IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.15241 of 2005 Date of decision: 5.8.2008 Sanjiv Kalia -----Petitioner Vs. PGI Chandigarh and others -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Mr. JS Bajwa, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Arun palli, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate for the respondents. Adarsh Kumar Goel,J. 1. This petition seeks quashing of order of promotion of respondent Nos. 2 to 5 dated 25.1.2003 Annexure P.11 and also seeks a direction for promotion of the petitioner as Assistant Engineer on regular basis. 2. Case of the petitioner is that he was working as Junior Engineer (Civil) since 2.6.1983 and his case was considered for further promotion as Assistant Engineer but instead of giving promotion to him, respondent Nos. 2 to 5 who were junior to him, were given promotion. Right of consideration for promotion accrued to the petitioner in the year 1997-98 when there were five Civil Writ Petition No.15241 of 2005 vacancies. On 13.11.2000, adverse remarks were conveyed to the petitioner against which representation was rejected. However, appeal against the rejection was pending. Reliance has been placed on a judgment of this Court dated 27.7.2004 in CWP No.1075 of 2003 (Parveen Kumar Wadehra v. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh), wherein it was held that since adverse remarks had been expunged, name of the petitioner should have been considered for promotion. Case of the petitioner should have been considered on the basis of record, which existed at the time when vacancies arose. Reference was made to judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.V.Sivaiah and others v. K.Addanki Babu and others, 1998(5) SLR 59, Gurdial Singh Fijji v. The State of Punjab and others, 1979(1) SLR 804 and a DB judgment of this Court in Er.Kulbir Singh, Executive Engineer PWD and others v. The State of Punjab, 2002 (5) SLR 565. 3. Stand of respondent No.1 is that in the year 1997-98, out of six vacancies, three were in the adhoc tenure posts for Construction Division to be filled by deputation. Out of the remaining three, 50% were to be filled up by promotion and 50% by direct recruitment. In the year 1998, three persons were senior to the petitioner who were given the current duty charge. The petitioner was at Sr.No.4 in the seniority list of Junior Engineers. Department Promotion Committee was held in the year 2001 to 2 Civil Writ Petition No.15241 of 2005 fill-up one post and the petitioner alongwith other candidates were duly considered and Mr. R.C.Sharma who was the senior-most in the list, was recommended by the DPC. In the next DPC on 13.1.2003, consideration was as per new recruitment rules approved with effect from 3.10.2000, wherein the petitioner was found not to be having bench marks required for promotion. Vide order dated 23.8.2005, adverse remarks against the petitioner were duly upheld by the appellate authority, which was conveyed to the petitioner on 9.8.2005. The judgment relied upon by the petitioner was distinguishable as the case of the petitioner therein was not considered at all. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Since the case of the petitioner was duly considered, judgment relied upon by the petitioner was distinguishable. Adverse entry against the petitioner was duly upheld. 6. We do not find any ground to interfere with the promotion of respondent Nos. 2 to 5 or for giving a direction for promotion of the petitioner. 7. The writ petition is dismissed. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge August 5, 2008 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) ‘gs’ Judge 3 Civil Writ Petition No.15241 of 2005 - 4