B. C. Ray, J. - (1.) These two appeals by special leave one by the Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala and the other by Gurdial Singh and others, who were defendants-respondents 3, 4, 6 and 7 in Civil Suit No. 293T/16-1-181/17-7-80 passed in R.S.A. No. 254/38 whereby the judgments and the decrees of the courts below were affiirmed decreeing the plaintiff-respondent's suit declaring that the plaintiff-respondent be deemed to have been promoted from the date when his juniors as mentioned in the suit were promoted to the posts of Line-Superintendents.
(2.) The case of the plaintiff in short is that the plaintiff-respondent Ravinder Kumar Sharma joined the service under respondent 1, Punjab State Electricity Board as a Line Man on 25th December, 1969 and he worked as apprentice Line Man from 29-12-1969 to 28-12-1970 on a fixed salary of Rs. 140/- per month. Thereafter he was allowed regular scale of pay of Rs. 110-330 since the date of his joining as a Line Man. The terms and conditions of the service of the Line Man as well as of the Line Superintendent are governed by the rules framed by the Punjab Government in exercise of its powers under Art. 309 of the Constitution which were termed as P.W.D. (Electricity Branch) Provisional Class III (Subordinate Posts) Rules 1952. Subsequently the State Electricity Board came into being and the Electricity Department came under the administration of the State Electricity Board.
(3.) The plaintiff has stated in the plaint that as a Line Man he had been performing his duties efficiently and honestly and there was never any complaint against his work. His work and conduct had always been appreciated by his superiors from time to time. He possesses the following qualifications:- 1. B. A. 2. I.T.I. (in the trade of Electrician 2 years' duration) 3. National Apprentice Certificate in the trade of Line Man (3 years' duration). All the Line Men under defendant 1, that is, Punjab State Electricity Board are either diploma holders or I.T.I. trained or non-diploma holders and they form and constitute one common cadre known as Line Man and in the same scale of Rs. 110-330. The seniority list of all these Line Men is common and joint. It has been further alleged that defendant 1 had been promoting officials from Line Men to the Line Superintendent on a pick and choose basis in consideration of the qualifications by fixing a quota between the diploma holders and non-diploma holders and this has resulted in arbitrary discrimination between the diploma holders and non-diploma holders Line Men thereby adversely affecting the promotional prospect of the non-diploma holders Line Men. It has been further stated that this policy of defendant I was set aside by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in L.P.A. No. 618 of 1975 fixing the quota between diploma holders and non-diploma holders Line Superintendents by orders dated 12-1-1965 and 27-6-1974. Though the minimum qualification for promotion of Line Man to Line Superintendent is however matriculation. The plaintiff also stated that by order dated 12-7-1977 respondent 1 promoted Gurdial Singh whose name appeared at S. No. 1451 in the common seniority list and also the defendant Jaswant Singh whose name appeared at S. No. 1546 in the said list as well as Ramesh Kumar standing at S. No. 2309 in the said seniority list to the post of Line Superintendent even though the plaintiff's position in the seniority list was at S. No. 995 and he was senior to these officials. Thus the plaintiff was passed over while his juniors were promoted. This policy of pick and choose, it has been stated, in promoting the officials is wholly illegal and discriminatory. It has been further pleaded that by office order No. 899 dated 17-8-1977 defendant 2, that is, the Chief Engineer of the Electricity Board further promoted Sudesh Kumar and Virender Kumar whose names stand at S. Nos. 1877 and 2279 in the joint seniority list as Line Superintendent from the Line Man. The petitioner, therefore, pleaded that the action of defendants 1 and 2 in fixing the quota between diploma holders and non-diploma holders Line Men for the purpose of promotion to the post of Line Superintendent and promoting defendants 3 to 7 to the post of Line-Superintendent from Line Man is wholly illegal, unconstitutional and arbitrary. The plaintiff, therefore, prayed for a decree declaring that the orders dated 12-7-1977 and 17-8-1977 promoting defendants 3 to 7 are illegal, discriminatory and null and void as it arbitrarily affects the rights of the plaintiff who is senior to them in not being promoted to the cadre of Line-Superintendent. The plaintiff also prayed for a direction that he be promoted to the post of Line-Superintendent from the date defendants 3 to 7 were promoted to the said post.;