IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 4329/2008 (OA 909/97) Date of Decision : May 6, 2009 Dharamdeep Singh Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and Another. Respondents. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?2 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Additional Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: (i) that the respondents may be directed to consider the applicant for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) alongwith officers mentioned in memo dated April 07, 1997, who are junior to the applicant as per final seniority list at Annexure A-4; and (ii) that the respondents may be directed to promote the applicant by treating him senior to officers at Serial No. 1 to 6 under the title Road Supervisors given in the Annexure A-1, if otherwise found suitable. The petitioner admittedly was initially appointed as Pump Operator in 1973. Lateron in 1974, he was assigned the duty of Work Inspector. He was also appointed as such. At the time of promotion of his juniors to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil), the respondents ignored the petitioner’s claim for the simple reason that 2 Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? : 2 : for the purpose of promotion, services rendered by him as Pump Operator can not be considered. There is no dispute that if the period of services rendered as Pump Operator is excluded, petitioner is not eligible for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil). The respondents have clarified that the persons allegedly Junior to the petitioner were considered and promoted as they were fully eligible for promotion. Simply because the pay scale of a Pump Operator and Work Inspector is same, that by itself would not be a ground for holding that the services rendered by the petitioner as Pump Operator, are to be considered for the promotional post, i. e., Junior Engineer (Civil). Pump Operator and Work Inspector are two different cadres. No legally enforceable right of the petitioner stands violated. In these circumstances, the present petition cannot be allowed. Hence, it is dismissed. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. May 6, 2009. bhupender