IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 10062 of 2008 Date of Decision : March 28, 2011 Amar Singh Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Dy. Advocate General with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Dy. Advocate General for the respondents-State. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “(i) That the respondents may be directed to consider the case of the applicant for promotion as a Driver, from the date his eligibility, as per the Rules with all consequential benefits forthwith. (ii) That the respondents may be directed to consider the case of the applicant for appointment as a driver, from the date of completion of 10 years as driver –cum- Cleaner, with all consequential benefits forthwith. (iii) That in the alternative, Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 The Respondents may be directed to consider the applicant as a driver under the direct quota in accordance with the R&P Rules in view of ground (1) of the OA with all consequential benefits, forthwith. (iv) The Respondents may be directed to provide promotional avenues to the category of the beldar for the higher post of driver etc. as given to other equal status/grade/scale post of Cleaner, in order to ensure parity in service and to avoid stagnation to the beldars forthwith. (v) That the records pertaining to the case may kindly be called for and perused. (vi) That any other relief(s) including the cost of the application may also be granted.” 2. Mr. Ranjan Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his client shall be content if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s case for promotion as a Driver with effect from the year 1997 onwards. His submission is based on the fact that even though petitioner was engaged as a Beldar in the year 1975 but however, on the admitted material placed on record by the respondents themselves, petitioner has worked as a Cleaner w.e.f. July, 1983 onwards inspite of the fact that he was accorded status of a work charged Beldar with effect from the year 1992 onwards. It is also his contention that petitioner was wrongly accorded this status of work charged employee (Beldar) which actually should have been that of a Cleaner for the 3 reason that work charged Beldar and Cleaner are in the same pay scale and even the nomenclature is that of Grade-IV employees. 3. In the reply respondents have placed on record the man-days chart showing that atleast w.e.f. July, 1983 petitioner was working as a Cleaner up to the year 1992. Petitioner has also placed on record Office Orders dated 24.3.1992 (Annexure A-2), 23.12.1995 (Annexure A-4) and log books (Annexures A-5 to A-17) to substantiate the fact that atleast with effect from the year 1983 onwards, he has been continuously working as a Cleaner. These documents cannot be disputed for the reason that they are part of the record maintained by the respondents themselves. 4. For the post of Driver, in accordance with the R & P Rules there is reservation by promotion to the extent of 30% from the category of Cleaner. The only eligibility criteria is that a Cleaner must be in the pay scale of `770 – 1350 with five years service in the grade. In the instant case pay scale of a Cleaner and Beldar is same and similar as is provided for in the Rules. Also the grade is same. Petitioner, who has been successfully working to the satisfaction of his employer as a Cleaner, for more than 5 years i.e. 14 years, is bound to be considered for promotion as a Driver. 5. Under these circumstances a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s case for promotion as a Driver on a vacancy which may have arisen after 1997. While doing so, respondents shall take into account the seniority of other similarly situated persons. Needful be positively done 4 within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment. All consequential benefits to follow. Monetary benefits, if any, due and admissible, be also released within the aforesaid period, failing which thereafter, petitioner shall be entitled to interest thereupon @ 9% per annum. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. March 28, 2011 (PK)