- (1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges orders dated 24.1.2002 (P-3 & P-4) promoting respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to the post of Private Secretary in the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 plus Rs. 200/- as Special Pay. The petitioner has also challenged that part of Appendix 'B' of the Haryana Vidhan Sabha Secretariat Rules, 1981 (for brevity, 'the Rules') which makes the Reporters eligible for promotion to the post of Private Secretary being ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution. A further prayer has been made for directing the official respondents to consider and promote the petitioner to the post of Private Secretary. Petitioner's case : Pleadings and grievance :
(2.) The dispute in the present case is, inter se, between Purushottam Dutt- petitioner, working as 'Personal Assistant', on the one hand and Sarvshri Vijay Kumar Kakkar and Rajender Singh, respondent Nos. 3 and 4 respectively on the other hand. Therefore, it is necessary for us to notice the factual position regarding their initial appointment and subsequent promotion(s). On 22.2.1995, the petitioner was appointed as a 'Personal Assistant' in the respondent Haryana Vidhan Sabha Secretariat. He has claimed that according to the Gradation List as it stood on 1.1.2001, he was the senior most permanent 'Personal Assistant'. Respondent No. 3 was appointed as 'English Reporter' on 26.6.1979, in the cadre of 'Reporter' in the respondent-Haryana Vidhan Sabha Secretariat. On 14.9.1999, he was promoted to the post of 'Chief Reporter' from the post of 'Reporter' and he was confirmed as such on 30.5.2001. Respondent No. 4 was appointed as 'Hindi Reporter' on 28.2.1996 in the cadre of 'Reporter' in the respondent Haryana Vidhan Sabha Secretariat. Both respondent Nos. 3 and 4 were further promoted to the post of 'Private Secretary' from their existing posts of 'Chief Reporter' and 'Reporter' respectively, vide orders dated 24.1.2002 (P-3 & P-4). It is pertinent to mention here that Shri Vijay Kumar Kakkar-respondent No. 3 was promoted as officiating Private Secretary w.e.f. 1.8.2001 consequent upon retirement of one Smt. Saroj Sharma on her attaining the age of superannuation on 31.7.2001. Shri Rajinder Singh-respondent No. 4 was promoted as Private Secretary w.e.f. 24.1.2002 vice Shri Subhash Chander, Private Secretary, upon his promotion as an Accounts Officer. A bird's eye view of the position of the petitioner vis-a-vis respondent Nos. 3 and 4 is discernible from the following table : JUDGEMENT_269_LAWS(P&H)7_2011.htm
(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have been promoted to the post of Private Secretary erroneously, illegally and in violation of 'the Rules' vide the impugned orders dated 24.1.2002 (P-3 & P-4). It has been submitted that as per entry at Sr. No. 8 in Appendix 'B' as it existed prior to the amendment of the Rules in the year 1997, the post of Private Secretary was required to be filled by appointment other than by direct recruitment out of Personal Assistant having three years experience and Senior Scale Stenographer/Reporter having eight years experience. However, by amending Appendix 'B' vide notification dated 19.12.1997, both the Personal Assistants and Reporters having five years experience have been made eligible to be promoted as Private Secretary. According to the petitioner this could not have been done because 'the Rules' do not contemplate common or joint seniority of the cadres of Personal Assistant and Reporter. Other than this, their mode of appointment and further avenues of promotion are also different. A Reporter is promoted as Chief Reporter and the Chief Reporter in turn is promoted as Editor of Debates. In the case of a Personal Assistant, he could be promoted only to the post of Private Secretary. The pay structure of the posts of Personal Assistant, Private Secretary, Reporter and Chief Reporter as on 1.1.1996 is also different as is patent from the following table : JUDGEMENT_269_LAWS(P&H)7_20112.htm;