I.S. Tiwana, J. - (1.) The petitioner impugns the order of his reversion from the post of Assistant Manager (Technical) passed by the Deputy Manager (Administration) of the respondent Corporation. This order is annexure P-2 and reads as follows:- "Shri H N. Bharti who was promoted to officiate as Assistant Manager (Technical) on purely ad-hoc basis in terms of office order No 25/1972 dated 19th April, 1972, has not been approved for regular promotion and, therefore, shall stand reverted as Technical Assistant Grade-I with effect from the date of issue of this order." The facts which are not in dispute are as follows:- With the abolition of the Food Department of the Government of India, the employees of that department were provisionally transferred to the Food Corporation of India with effect from 1st Jan., 1966. In the light of that policy decision, the a, petitioner too was sent to the Corporation as Technical Assistant Grade-I. Later he was promoted by the Corporation to the post of Assistant Manager (Technical) with effect from 19th April, 1972 on ad hoc basis. On 15th May, 1975, a policy decision (annexure P3) was taken by the Food Corporation wherein it was stipulated that the person who had been finally transferred by the Government of India to the Corporation with effect from 1st March, 1969 (the date on which these employees had been transferred on regular basis) and had been promoted, though on ad hoc basis, should be taken to have successfully completed the probationary period of one year and the required order of their regular appointment under regulation 15 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff Regulations) 1971 (for short, the Staff Regulations) be passed. It may be mentioned here that the petitioner had admittedly been promoted to the post of Assistant Manager (Technical) in terms of Note Below regulation 10. Still, later, instead of taking the petitioner to have been confirmed in terms of the policy decision annexure P3, he has been reverted vide the impugned order and, as the order itself indicates, on the ground that this case 'has not been approved for regular promotion' by the Zonal Promotion Committee.
(2.) The contention of Shri J.L. Gupta, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, is that in terms of the policy decision annexure P3, the petitioner should be deemed to have been confirmed with the expiry of one year from the date of his promotion as Assistant Manager (Technical) and there was no question of this case being considered by the Zonal Committee for his regular promotion to that post. On behalf of the Corporation it is pleaded that as a matter of fact, the case of the petitioner was not considered in the light of annexure P3 on account of the fact that by the date it had been issued the petitioner had not been transferred by the Government of India to the Corporation on regular basis.
(3.) It is now the conceded position that since the filing of this petition, the Government of India has issued notification on 20th Sept., 1979, whereby the petitioner has permanently been transferred to the Corporation with effect from 1st March, 1979 i. e. from the same very date on which most of the employees of the erstwhile Food Department had been transferred to the Corporation. In the face of this factual position, the stand of the Corporation that either the case of the petitioner was not liable to be considered in terms of annexure P. 3 or was not so considered cannot be upheld. Since the petitioner's services have been transferred to the Corporation with effect from 1st March, 1969, vide notification dated 20th Sept., 1979, the Corporation is obliged to consider his case in the light of annexure P. 3. In the light of this conclusion of mine, the reversion order annexure P. 2 which as already indicated, has primarily been passed on the basis of non-approval of petitioner's promotion by the Zonal Promotion Committee obviously cannot be sustained and has to be quashed. I order accordingly.;