AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. - (1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court with a grievance that the quota, as prescribed under Rule 7 of the Punjab Jails Department State Service (Class -III -Executive) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as '1963 Rules'), has not been adhered to while making promotion to the post of Sub -Assistant Superintendent, Jail.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner contends that as per the said Rules and the method prescribed therein, specific quota has been provided for the category of Jail Warders, Assistant Probation Officers, Head Warders, Warders and Clerks/Warders. As per the said Rules, 50% of the posts are to be filled up from Assistant Probation Officers, Head Warders and Warders, 25% through Clerks and the remaining 25% from Clerks/Warders, who have combined experience for a minimum period of five years in the clerical and Warders line including not less than two years in the Warders line. Petitioner, who belongs to the clerical cadre, asserts that the requisite quota has not been granted to the Clerks, because of which, the petitioner has not been promoted although he was eligible for promotion since the year 2004 and all the promotions, which have been made to the rank of Sub -Assistant Superintendent, Jail of 19.02.2004, were from the cadre of Head Warders without taking into consideration the quota of the other categories. He contends that although the petitioner has been promoted to the post of Sub - Assistant Superintendent, Jail vide order dated 04.11.2008 (Annexure P -2) but he being eligible and there being a quota available, he should have been promoted along with the other Head Warders in the year 2004. Prayer has thus, been made for directing the respondents to promote the petitioner w.e.f. 19.02.2004, the date on which promotions to the post of Sub -Assistant Superintendent, Jail were made by the respondents. It is the stand of the counsel for the respondents that the petitioner, in pursuance to the promotion order dated 19.02.2004, did not represent or put forth his claim for promotion. In the year 2008, he submitted his willingness and consent for consideration for promotion and on the basis of his consent, his case for promotion has been considered and he has been promoted accordingly. It is further stated that none of the candidates from the category of Clerks, who was junior to the petitioner, has been promoted to the post of Sub -Assistant Superintendent, Jail prior to the petitioner between the period 20.02.2004 and 03.11.2008. Since none in his cadre, who is junior to the petitioner, has been promoted, the petitioner has no right for consideration for promotion to the post of Sub -Assistant Superintendent, Jail w.e.f. 20.02.2004. He, therefore, contends that the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
(3.) I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and with their assistance, have gone through the records of the case.;