RAM SINGH MALIK Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
RAN SINGH MALIK
STATE OF HARYANA
Click here to view full judgement.
Pattanaik, J. -
(1.)Leave granted in S.L.P. (C) No. 5117 of 1999.
(2.)This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned single Judge of High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Civil Writ Petition No. 7893 of 1993 which stood affirmed by the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 739 of 1995 in dismissing the L.P.A. in limine. The question for consideration is whether the appellant can be said to have been appointed to a post in Haryana Veterinary Service Class I, when he was appointed as Deputy Director (Feed and Fodder), on being selected by the Haryana Public Service Commission by order dated 27th April, 1987. The appellants case in brief before the High Court was that on 15-7-1983 he was appointed as Deputy Director (Feed and Fodder) on ad hoc basis in his own pay scale. While he was so continuing an advertisement was issued on 18-8-1986 for recruitment to a temporary post of Deputy Director (Feed and Fodder) in Haryana Veterinary Service Class I in Animal Husbandry Department and the appellant applied for the said post. Ultimately he was selected by the Public Service Commission and the recommendation of the Public Service Commission having been accepted by the Governor he was appointed by direct recruitment to the post of Deputy Director (Feed and Fodder) in Haryana Veterinary Service Class I in the scale of pay of Rs. 1200-50-1500-60-1860 by order dated 27th April, 1987. The appointment letter unequivocally indicated that he will be governed by Haryana Veterinary Service Class I, Rules, 1930 and will be on probation for a period of 2 years. On 2-6-1987 the scale of pay of post in Class I Haryana Veterinary Service was revised to Rs. 1400 to 2100 with effect from 1-2-1981 but that revised scale was not given to the appellant for which he had made representation. On 16-5-1988 there had been a further revision of the pay scale in the scale of Rs. 3000 to 4500, but instead of granting the revised pay scale the appellant was given the pay scale of Rs. 1400 to Rs. 2100. The appellant made yet another representation but his grievances not having been redressed he filed the writ petition which was registered as Civil Writ Petition No. 2728 of 1989. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 were appointed on different post in Class I Haryana Veterinary Service under different schemes on 6-2-1989. When the tentative seniority list was published in the year 1992 of the officers in Class I appellants name was not shown whereas names of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 had been shown even though they were junior to the appellant. Appellant again submitted a representation for inclusion of his name in the gradation list and ascribing him his position in the gradation list. The appellant was given a personal hearing but no order having been passed he filed a Writ Petition No. 7893 of 1993, which stood dismissed by judgment dated 31-8-1995, which is the subject-matter of challenge. As already stated, the appellant moved the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal but the Division Bench dismissed the same in limine.
(3.)Before the learned single Judge the State of Haryana took the stand that the post of Deputy Director (Feed and Fodder) is a non-veterinary ex-cadre post in the Animal Husbandry Department, and the appellant, who is a graduate in Agricultural Science cannot claim parity with graduates holding Class I post in Haryana Veterinary Service. It was further stated that the post of Deputy Director (Feed and Fodder) carried a pay scale lower than that of other posts in the Class I Haryana Veterinary Service and even the appointment letter of the appellant stated so unequivocally and, therefore, the appellant cannot claim the same scale of pay as that of other posts in the Class I Haryana Veterinary Service. So far as the seniority is concerned, it was stated that the post of Feed and Fodder being an ex-cadre post the appellant was not shown in the gradation list and so also cannot claim seniority over respondents Nos. 2 and 3 who from the date of their appointment in February, 1989 had been getting a higher scale of pay. While the writ petition was pending before the High Court the Governor of Haryana in exercise of powers conferred under proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution of India made Rules regulating the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to the Haryana Veterinary (Group A) Service called, The Haryana Veterinary Service Group A Rules, 1995. Rule 3 thereof indicates that the service would comprise of the post shown in Appendix A to the Rules. Appendix A did not include the post of Deputy Director (Feed and Fodder) and on the other hand, the said post of Deputy Director (Feed and Fodder) was shown to be a post in non-veterinary cadre carrying a pay scale of Rs. 2200 to 4000. The impact of the aforesaid Rules on the point that arises for consideration will be considered at the appropriate stage.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.