- (1.) This civil writ petition has been filed by Smt. Shakuntla Bhanot, Jai Kishan Sharma, Bijender Singh and Bodh Raj, petitioners, who were initially appointed as Steno-typists in respondent No. 2- Board, for issuance of a mandamus directing the respondents to consider them , or the post of Sub Divisional Clerks from the date when the Clerks, who were junior to them, were promoted and for releasing the consequential benefits accruing therefrom, including the seniority, salary and interest thereon. According to the petitioners, they are being governed by Haryana. State Agricultural Marketing Board Service Rules, 1974 (in brief 'the Rules") and as per those Rules, the next promotion from the post of Steno-Typist is to the post of Junior Scale Stenographer in steno's cadre. The Steno-Typists working in Haryana State are also eligible for promotion on clerical side i.e. to the post of Sub Divisional Clerk. The Board has provided promotion avenues to the Clerks. There is no specific provision in the Rules for the promotion of the Steno- typists to the post of Sub Divisional Clerks. However, as per Rule 14 of those Rules, in respect of the employees, not expressly provided in the Rules, are to be dealt with under the Punjab Civil Services Rules, as application in the State of Haryana. As per those Rules, they are entitled for promotion on the clerical side. In the Month of March, 1987, the Board resolved to provide promotion to the Steno Typists on the clerical side to the extent of 75%. They are interested in their promotion on the clerical side. On account of shortage of Clerks in the Board, some of the candidates, who were selected a Steno- Typists in the year 1980, were appointed as Clerks and the, have been promoted as Sub Divisional Clerks whereas, they have been ignored, though they joined the Board before them. They made a number of representations for their promotion as Sub Divisional Clerks, but to no effect. The act of the Board in not promoting them as Sub Divisional Clerks, on the ground that they are ineligible, being Steno-Typists, is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) The claim of the petitioners was resisted by the Board. In the written statement, it has been contended that the petitioners had the alternative remedy under Section 42 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961(in brief "the Act") and the writ petition deserved to be dismissed on that ground alone. - As per the service rules applicable to the employees of the Board, there are different channels of promotion and the channel of promotion from the post of Steno-Typist is to the Junior Scale Stenographer. The Punjab Civil Services Rule, 1961, have no applicability to the service condition of the employees of the Board and under Section 43 of the Act, it is the State Government, which is empowered to make the rules for those employees. The Board on its own cannot make any such rules. A recommendation was made for making provision in the services rules by passing a Resolution but that proposal/Resolution has not been accepted by the State Government. There are different cadres of Steno-Typists and Clerks and they are entitled to different scales e special pay and for that joint seniority list of Steno- Typist and Clerk: cannot be prepared. In fact, the petitioner has tried to confuse the issue by making reference to the appointment of the Clerks and the Steno-Typists. As there are separate seniority lists, so the petitioners cannot claim any seniority vis-a-vis the Clerks.
(3.) This petition was withdrawn on behalf of petitioner No. 3. and the same was dismissed as such qua that petitioner, vide order dated 20.1.2002. Counsel for petitioner No. 3 has not pressed this petition on behalf of that petitioner, as according to him, he has been promoted to the post of Personal Assistant. This writ petition has been pressed on behalf of petitioners No. 2 and 4 only.;