CWP No.1356 of 1989 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Date of decision: 05.02.2009 Raja Ram ... Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and another ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: None for the petitioner. Mr.Yatinder Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for the respondents. PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral): Heard. Perused the writ petition. The petitioner was appointed as Clerk on 28.04.1952. He was promoted as Assistant on 07.12.1959. He was further promoted as Superintendent Grade-III on 09.12.1978 which was revised to 13.05.1972. He was further promoted as Superintendent Grade-I on 10.12.1979 which date was again revised to 1.6.1976. He was confirmed on the post of Superintendent Grade-III on 02.11.1975. He was further confirmed on the post of Superintendent Grade-I on 01.10.1980. On the other hand, respondent No.4 was appointed as Assistant by direct recruitment on 02.02.1956. He was promoted to the post of Superintendent Grade-III on 08.05.1978, but was given CWP No.1356 of 1989 -2- proforma promotion with effect from 23.06.1977. Respondent No.4 was again promoted as Superintendent Grade-I on 09.06.1980 which was revised to 01.04.1980. He was confirmed on the post of Superintendent Grade-III on 02.09.1981 and on the post of Superintendent Grade-I on 01.10.1982. The petitioner is a scheduled caste candidate, whereas respondent No.4 belong to general category. On the basis of the category, the petitioner got jumps in promotion on the basis of roster points. Otherwise in the feeding cadre, petitioner is senior to respondent No.4 on the post of Superintendent Grade-I. The posting order of the petitioner as Administrative Officer-II, dated 27.2.1985, Annexure P-2, contain stipulations that he will not be entitled to any additional remuneration by virtue of his appointment as such, the appointment/arrangement is purely on the administrative exigencies and without any right to claim seniority,pay etc. It is further stipulated in the order that this arrangement is liable to be terminated on the appointment of regular incumbent against this post by the Government. Respondent No.4 was given charge of Administrative Officer-II vide order dated 21.1.1989 (Annexure P-3) for a period of six months or till the date of his suitability is approved by the Punjab Public Service Commission. It is alleged that the petitioner continued to hold the charge till the passing of the impugned order dated 21.01.1989, Annexure P-3. It is this order which has been challenged by the petitioner in the present writ petition. The case of the petitioner is that he is senior to respondent CWP No.1356 of 1989 -3- No.4 and should have been promoted as Administrative Officer-II. The stand of the respondents is that the petitioner was junior to respondent No.4 in the feeding channel and it was only on account of roster point that he was given the benefit of promotion earlier than respondent No.4. However, the petitioner was never promoted as Administrative Officer-II on substantive post. It was only a temporary arrangement whereby the petitioner was given the charge of Administrative Officer-II vide order dated 27.2.1985, Annexure P-2, which was terminated on the regular promotion of respondent No.4 on the post in question in accordance with rules. The petitioner and respondent No.4 have retired from service. Since the petitioner was never promoted on the substantive post as it was only a temporary arrangement which was terminated as per the stipulation in the order dated 27.02.1985, Annexure P-2, no right of the petitioner has been infringed. In view of the above, I find no merit in the present writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. 05.02.2008. (PERMOD KOHLI) BLS JUDGE Note: Whether to be referred to the Reporter? NO