Devinder Gupta, J. - (1.) The grievance made by the petitioner in this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on 28.10.1987 is against the final seniority list circulated on 20.8.1986 through circular Annexure XIV that he should have been placed below serial No.46 and above serial No.47 instead of being placed at serial No.62. Consequential directions sought are for assigning him correct seniority in the list of Assistant Engineers w.e.f. the date of recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee, namely, 28/29.6.1971 and to issue further directions to consider his case for further promotions to the post of Superintending Engineer w.e.f. 7.8.1987 when respondents 3 & 4, his juniors were promoted and to grant all other consequential benefits.
(2.) The undisputed facts in brief are that the petitioner possessing qualification "Inter Overseer Certificate" which is equivalent to Diploma in Civil Engineering, joined the Municipal service in the cadre of Junior Engineer (Civil) on 4.8.1959. The next promotional post is of Assistant Engineer. The Recruitment Regulations for the post of Assistant Engineer were framed in consultation with the UPSC in 1970. Under Section 98 of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, Recruitment Regulations can be made only after consultation with the Commission. The regulations were framed in consultation with UPSC by the Corporation on 4.5.1970 and were approved by Lt. Governor vide notification of Delhi Administration dated 27.6.1970. However, the said Regulations were published in the Gazette dated 30.8.1979 in the Delhi Gazette.
(3.) The petitioner was given current duty charge of Assistant Engineer in January, 1971. Along with others he was given ad-hoc appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) through resolution No.286 (Annexure-II) dated 19.7.1991 and was given officiating promotion and was appointed to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) on regular basis w.e.f. 25.10.1971 through office order dated 10.4.1973. This office order appointing the petitioner to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) on regular basis was passed on the basis of recommendations made by the Departmental Promotion Committee on 28/29.6.1971 as approved by the Union Public Service Commission (for short 'UPSC') through its recommendation dated 25.10.1971. The petitioner was shown at serial No.9 in the merit list of approved panel of Engineers. Though the petitioner earlier had also made some grievance claiming seniority over Mr. C.M. Vij and Mr. D.D. Nayyar, who were shown at serial Nos. 15 and 19 in the said merit list but a statement was made by the learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments that the petitioner now does not press his claim and no challenge is being made to the seniority list vis-a-vis the promotees, including Mr. C.M. Vij and Mr. D.D. Nayyar. On 2.1.1974, Mr. J.P. Khurana, respondent No.8, and Mr. B.S. Solanki, respondent No.10, applied for direct recruitment when the posts of Assistant Engineers was advertised by UPSC. They were selected against the direct recruitment quota and along with them 18 others were also selected and appointed by direct recruitment. Petitioner's grievance is that they were wrongly shown senior to him in the impugned seniority list. This action is under challenge by the petitioner. It is also the petitioner's case that on 2.1.1975 UPSC recommended regular promotion of 10 Junior Engineers to the post of Assistant Engineers against the promotion quota. Some of them were earlier considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee in 1971 but were not recommended. These persons were appointed as Assistant Engineers on regular basis w.e.f. 2.1.1975 and are also shown as senior to the petitioner.;