M.R.Sharma, J. - (1.) The petitioner and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 originally joined the Agriculture Department of the erstwhile State of Patiala and the East Punjab States' Union (hereinafter referred to as Pepsu) as Class II officers After the re-organisation of the erstwhile States of Punjab and Pepsu they became members of the Punjab Agricultural Service Class II In the seniority list of the officers belonging to this class, corrected up to Jan. 1, 1961, respondent No 2 was shown at No. 30, respondent No. 3 at S.No. 39 and the petitioner at No 40 In other words, the petitioned was admittedly junior to respondents No. 2 and 3 in the Class II Service On Aug. 2, 1965 the petitioner and respondent No. 3 were promoted as Deputy Directors of Agriculture, which posts are borne on the cadre of Class I Service The petitioner happened to be posted at Chandigarh and he joined his position Aug. 4, 1965, bur respondent No 3 was posted as Assistant Horticulturist Kulu, at the time when the orders of his promotion were passed. He could not join as Deputy Director before being relieved of the post as he was holding and took over as Deputy Director at Hansi on Aug. 18, 1965. The promotions of respondent No. 3 and the petitioner were made on ad hoc basis for a period of three months or till such time as the appointments were made on regular basis.
(2.) At that time respondent No. 2 was working in the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and was not considered for promotion. In Oct., 1966, the State of Punjab allowed the officers sent on deputation to the Agricultural University, Ludhiana, to come back to the State Service, which respondent No 2 did. He joined his department on Oct. 28, 1966, and proceeded on leave. On his return, he was promoted as Deputy Director on Feb. 22, 1967. On behalf of the State of Punjab, it is clarified that he was eligible for promotion with effect from Aug. 2, 1965, the day on which the petitioner and respondent No. 2 were promoted.
(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that he joined the Punjab Agricultural Service Class on Aug. 4, 1965, whereas respondents Nos. 2 and 3 joined this service on Feb. 22, 1967 and Aug. 18, 1965, respectively. His continuous length of Service as P.A.S. Class I officer is more than that of respondents 2 and 3 and therefore, he should rank senior to both Vide letter dated Feb. 13, 1970, it was certified by the Government that the petitioner and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 completed their period of probation successfully with effect from the date noted against each name:- JUDGEMENT_27_LAWS(P&H)5_1974.html;