- (1.) Although multi-fold prayers have been made in the writ petition, in my view it is not necessary to make an adjudication on all the claims made by the petitioner because the writ petition deserves to be allowed on a short ground namely, that annexure P/11 dated April 28, 1993, by which deemed promotion has been given to respondent No. 2 in the cadre of Assistant Accounts Officer with effect from 26th November, 1981, is contrary to the principles of natural justice and is, therefore, liable to be quashed.
(2.) In brief, case of the petitioner is that he and respondent No. 2 had joined service of respondent No. 1 as Accountant and Senior Accountant respectively. Respondent No. 2 applied for direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer and on his selection, order dated 1st January, 1980 (Annexure P/1) was issued, appointing respondent No. 2 as Assistant Accounts Officer. After his appointment to the said post against the quota of direct recruits, respondent No. 2 was called upon to give up his claim based on his past service. In response to Annexure P/3, respondent No. 2 wrote Annexure P/4 dated 13th February, 1980, informing that he would resign from the existing post after completion of the probation period. Subsequently, respondent No. 2 was promoted as Senior Accounts Officer vide order Annexure P/6, dated December 23, 1980. In the tentative seniority list of Assistant Accounts Officers, issued by respondent No. 1 vide circular dated January 27, 1988, the petitioner was shown at serial No. 15 with his date of promotion in the cadre of Senior Accounts Officer as November 22, 1980. Respondent No. 2 was shown at serial No. 16 with his date of appointment as 7th January, 1980. Petitioner had been shown higher in the seniority list presumably on the ground that he was a promotee and respondent No. 2 was a direct recruit. After over five years, Managing Director of respondent No. 1 accepted the request made by respondent No. 2 for restoring his position in the original seniority list as it stood prior to his appointment as Assistant Accounts Officer by way of direct recruitment. At the same time, Managing Director treated respondent No. 2 as promoted on the post of Assistant Accounts Officer with effect from 27th November, 1980. His seniority has also been changed from serial No. 16 to a number between 6 and 7. The petitioner protested against this change in the seniority and having failed to persuade respondent No. 1 to downgrade the seniority of respondent No. 2, he has filed this petition.
(3.) In addition to his claim that Annexure P/11 dated April 28, 1993 has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, the petitioner has stated that respondent No. 2 has been unlawfully promoted as Senior Accounts Officer and he, who happened to be senior to respondent No. 2, has merely been given charge of Senior Accounts Officer. His further assertion is that although he is discharging the duties of Senior Accounts Officer, he is being paid salary in the pay-scale prescribed for the post of Assistant Accounts Officer.;