Augustine George Masih, J. - (1.) Petitioners have approached this Court challenging the promotion of respondents No.3 and 4 whereby they have been promoted to the post of General Manager and have been posted as Deputy Transport Controller (Traffic)/Flying Squad Officer (Traffic).
(2.) It is the contention of counsel for the petitioners that the services of the petitioners is governed by the Haryana Transport Department (Group A) Service Rules, 1992. Rule 11 of the Rules deals with the recruitment of service and Appendix-A deals with the post, number and character of the post. Rule 9 of the Rules deals with the recruitment of the service i.e. method of recruitment. In the said Rule, 9(k) deals with appointment to the post of Deputy Transport Controller (Traffic) and Flying Squad Officer (Traffic) and Rule 9(l) deals with the post of General Manager and Secretary, Regional Transport Authority. Sub-Rule 2 of Rule 9 states that all promotions unless otherwise provided, shall be made on Seniority-cum-Merit basis and seniority alone shall not confer any right to such promotions. He, on the basis of the statutory rules, contends that the petitioners being senior-most Traffic Managers were entitled to consideration for promotion to the post of Deputy Transport Controller (Traffic) and Flying Squad Officer (Traffic).
(3.) He, further contends that the appointment/promotion of respondents No.3 and 4, thus, cannot sustain as they do not belong to the cadre of Traffic Manager. Although respondent No.3 belongs to the cadre of Traffic Manager but has already been promoted to the post of General Manager and, therefore, he is not entitled for promotion to the post of Deputy Transport Controller (Traffic)/Flying Squad Officer (Traffic). He, accordingly, contends that the impugned order cannot sustain.;