G. B. Pattanaik, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 14th July, 1995 passed by the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 1374 of 1992. By the impugned judgment the Tribunal has directed the appellant to treat the respondent as having been promoted as Stenographer in the pay scale of Rs. 106-200 with effect from 31st May, 1966 and give him all consequential benefits flowing therefrom in his own stream of Stenography. It was further directed that there should be no recovery from the respondent who has worked against various posts in the meantime.
(2.) The brief facts leading to the filing of application by the respondent before the Tribunal may be stated hereunder. The respondent joined the Public Works Department of the Government of Himachal Pradesh as a Clerk in November, 1958. While so countinuing he was appointed as a Steno-typist on July 18, 1964 and was confirmed against the said post with effect from 1st January, 1972. On 2nd April, 1971, the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) was constituted in exercise of powers under Section 5 of the Indian Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. With effect from 31st August, 1971 the Department of Multi Purpose Project and Power of the Government of Himachal Pradesh was closed. On account of the creation of the Board on and from the said date, on abolition of the Multi Purpose Project and Power Department of the Government, the Board took over the services of all the erstwhile employees of the department on fresh contract of employment being executed by those employees but it was clearly stipulated that the employees will continue as employees of the Government until their final absorption by the Board or their services stand terminated in accordance with law. It may be stated that the department of Multi Purpose Project and Power of the Government issued the notice of discharge of the respondent from the service on account of the closure of the department by letter dated 31st August 1971. On September 9, 1971 the appellant Board issued an offer of appointment to the respondent intimating therein that the Board would be prepared to take the respondent on semi permanent basis as a Lower Division Clerk in the grade of Rs. 110-250 and in ad hoc capacity as Stenographer in the grade of Rs. 160-400. It was also clearly stipulated that the respondent will have no right for continuance against the post of Stenographer until he is appointed against the said post on regular basis by a competent authority of the Board. The respondent was called upon to indicate as to whether he would be agreeable to the terms and conditions mentioned in the offer of appointment as stated above. By letter dated 9th November, 1971, the respondent himself made an application for the post of Lower Division Clerk on permanent basis under the State Electricity Board and to allow him to continue on ad hoc basis against the post of Stenographer. The Board framed a set of Regulations to regulate the recruitment promotion and confirmation of the ministerial services under the Board, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 79(c) read with Section 15 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 called the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Recruitment and Promotion (Regulations) for Ministerial Employees of the Board, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as ('the Regulations') which became operative with effect from 1st July, 1972. The respondent became an employee of the Board as a junior Scale Stenographer by order dated 7th June, 1973 with effect from 1st January, 1972. Under the Regulations appointment to different posts under the Board could be made by direct recruitment as well as by promotion and the criteria for promotion was on the basis of recommendation of a duly constituted departmental promotion committee which committee in turn would recommend in case of non-selection post by virtue of the seniority of the employee and in case of a selection post by virtue of merit which is apparent from Regulation 5 providing procedure for appointment. It was also indicated therein that the departmental promotion committee shall be guided by the procedure approved by the Board for selection post.Regulation 8 provided that the method of recruitment, promotion, minimum qualification period of probation etc. for each of the Board service are as set forth in the Appendices 'A' and 'B'. Under Appendix 'A' the post of Head Clerk/Head Assistant in the pay-scale of Rs. 225-500 could be filled up by promotion from amongst the UDCs who opted for administration wing as well as by promotion from amongst the Stenographers in junior scale who have qualified in the departmental examination meant for clerks. The post of Head Clerk was a non-selection post. The ratio between the two feeder cadres as indicated above is 9:1. In other words, as against 10 vacancies in the post of Head Clerk, 9 would be filled up form the UDCs and one from the Stenographer Junior Scale. The respondent had been promoted as a Head Clerk in accordance with the aforesaid procedure on 23rd August, 1974. While he was so continuing by order dated 27th March, 1976, 18 posts of Junior Scale Stenographers stood upgraded to Senior Scale Stenographers. As the respondent had already been promoted as Head Clerk since 23rd August, 1974 he was not considered for being appointed to any one of these upgraded posts of Senior Stenographers. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the Board he filed a writ petition some times in June 1976 which was registered as Civil Writ Petition No. 336 of 1976. The Himachal Pradesh High Court allowed the said writ petition filed by the respondent by judgment dated 11th September, 1981, by coming to the conclusion that the respondent having been promoted to the post of Head Clerk merely on ad hoc basis could legitimately claim to be appointed against the upgraded post of Senior Stenographer by exercising his option to revert to his substantive post Jr. Stenographer. The High Court therefore, directed the Board to consider the respondent's case for promotion to the post of Sr. Scale Stenographer under the Rules and Regulations existing when those posts became available. This decision of the learned Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court became final as the Letters Patent Appeal No. 35 of 1981 filed by the Board stood dismissed by the Division Bench on 18th November, 1991. A departmental promotion committee pursuant to the direction of the High Court in the aforesaid judgment considered the case of the respondent for promotion to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer but being of the view that the respondent has lost touch with the stenography and typing eversince his promotion and absorption as a Head Clerk in August, 1974, would not be suitable for the post of Senior Scale Stenographer, did not recommend his case for the post of senior stenographer. The departmental promotion committee, therefore, recommended the promotion of the respondent to the post of Head Clerk/Head Assistant. The respondent then filed a contempt petition alleging that the direction of the High Court has not been carried out, which stood dismissed by order dated 27th June, 1983 on a finding that in the facts and circumstances it cannot be held that there has been a violation of the Court's direction. The respondent along with three others filed a second contempt petition, which was registered as CCP No. 2 of 1984 but that also stood dismissed by order dated 25th May, 1984. The respondent, therefore, filed a fresh writ petition wihch was registered as Civil Writ Petition No. 431 of 1984 but later on chose to withdraw the same as Board itself issued certain office orders on July 12, 1985 and the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 12th September, 1985. The respondent then filed a fresh writ petition along with one Narotam Dutt Sharma which was registered as CWP No. 1088 of 1985 and that petition stood transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal on constitution of the Tribunal and was registered as Transfer Application No. 741 of 1986. Shri Sharma had made a representation to the Secretary of the Board. The Tribunal being cognizant of the fact that a representation by one of the petitioners is pending before the Board, disposed of the application by order dated July 11, 1991 directing the Board to consider the representation and render a reasoned decision within two months. The Board took a final decision on the representation of Shri Sharma and passed a reasoned order on 19th November, 1991 which was placed before the Tribunal and the Tribunal merely took that decision into consideration and held that the Transfer Application No. 741 of 1986 has become infructuous. The respondent then filed a fresh application before the Tribunal which was registered as O.A. No. 1374 of 1992 out of which the present appeal arises. The Tribunal disposed of the application in favour of the respondent by order dated 14th July, 1995 by issuing directions as already stated and hence the present appeal.
(3.) In the impugned judgment the Tribunal came to hold that the direction of the High Court dated 11th September, 1981 in CWP No. 336 of 1976 holding that the respondent was entitled to be considered for promotion in his own stream of stenography did not authorise the departmental promotion committee to hold him unsuitable for the post of Senior Stenographer and to recommend the promotion of the respondent to the post of Head Clerk which was done by the Board by order dated 11th August, 1982. The Tribunal, therefore, reiterated that the respondent being the holder of the post of Steno-typist on substantive basis was entitled to be considered for promotion in his own stream and that not having been done, the rights of the respondent have been infringed. The Tribunal also took into account the fact that the respondent has been promoted in the clerical line not only to the post of Head Clerk but to the still higher post of Office Superintendent, and thought it fit not to quash the said promotion notwithstanding the earlier finding that the respondent was only entitled to be considered for promotion in his own stream of stenography. The Tribunal then considered the question as to what direction could be given and being of the view that the respondent was senior to one Shri S. S. Kaushal in the cadre of Steno-typist was entitled to be promoted to the post of Stenographer in the pay scale of Rs. 106-200 with effect from 31st May, 1966 and would be entitled to further consequential benefits above Shri Kaushal. Ultimately, the Tribunal directed the Board to treat the respondent as having been promoted as Stenographer with effect from 31th May, 1966 and further directed to give all consequential benefits flowing therefrom in his own stream of stenography only. It was further observed that there would be no recovery from the respondent who in the meantime has worked against several clerical posts.;