CWP No.1665 of 1994 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 12.01.2010 Ram Saran Khurana & Another ...Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana & Others …Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: None for the petitioner Mr.RS Kundu, Addl.A.G., Haryana Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) Petitioner no.1 was appointed as Conductor on 7.10.1965. Prior to that, he has served in the Indian Army during the National Emergency. He claims benefit of military service and deemed date of his appointment as Conductor as on 24.8.1964. Petitioner no.2 was appointed as Conductor on 5.6.1964 and promoted as Inspector on 16.12.1988. The petitioners were seeking their retrospective promotion from the date persons allegedly junior to them were promoted. Petitioners have given names of some persons in paragraphs 6 to 9 of the writ petition. In the detailed reply filed by the respondents-State, it is stated that petitioner no.1 has been granted the benefit of military service by the General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Chandigarh on 23.10.1986 by fixing the seniority w.e.f. 24.8.1964 and on that basis, he has been promoted as CWP No.1665 of 1994 2 Inspector on 14.12.1988. Petitioner no.2 was also promoted on the basis of joint seniority list vide order dated 14.12.1988. It is further stated that there was no joint seniority list in the year 1967. The joint tentative seniority list was prepared during 1980 and the same was circulated for the first time in the year 1983. Prior to 1980, seniority list was being prepared at depot level and the promotions were made amongst the conductors working in respective depot as per seniority. It was only in the year 1980 that a joint seniority was prepared and the promotions are being made on the basis of joint seniority list. It is, however, specifically mentioned that no person junior to the petitioners has been promoted. With regard to the certain names mentioned in the writ petition, it is stated that some of the employees were promoted against Backward Class and Scheduled Caste quota or in terms of the directions of the High Court or on the basis of the recommendations made by the Subordinate Service Selection Board, Haryana. The petitioners have been promoted according to their tentative seniority list. No replication has been filed to the aforesaid factual position. In any case, the petitioners have not challenged the seniority or promotion of any person in the writ petition nor any such person has been impleaded as party in this writ petition. In the given circumstances, no relief can be granted to the petitioners. I find no merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 12.01.2010 MFK