KIRPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
LAWS(P&H)-2006-8-159
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on August 01,2006

KIRPAL SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

ASHUTOSH GUPTA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

J.S.Khehar, J. - (1.)Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has impugned the validity of the Punjab Soil and Water Conservation and Waste Land Development Class-III (non-ministerial) Service Rules, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the 2001 Rules). The point of attack at the hands of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is, that the posts of Draftsman, Head Draftsman and Circle Head Draftsman are only to be filled up from those who possess the qualification of certificate of Draftsman (Civil) from an Industrial Training Institute. It is, however, the vehement contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, that a large number of Junior Draftsmen, are being promoted to the posts of Draftsman, Head Draftsman, and Circle Head Draftsman, despite the fact that they do not have the aforesaid qualification.
(2.)We have considered the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The statutory rules under reference have been placed on the record of this case as Annexure P6. The post of Junior Draftsman has been mentioned at Sr. No.13 in the Appendix attached to the 2001 Rules. It is stipulated therein, that post of Junior Draftsman, is to be filled up by way of direct recruitment alone, wherein one of the prescribed educational qualifications is, two years certificate of Draftsman (Civil) from an Industrial Training Institute. In view of the prescription of the aforesaid qualification, it is apparent, that the Junior Draftsman who are considered for onward promotion first as Draftsman, and thereafter as Head Draftsman and Circle Head Draftsman, can only be such persons, who possess the qualification of two years certificate of Draftsman (Civil) from an Industrial Training Institute.
(3.)In order to explain the position to us, it is the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, that the post of Junior Draftsman was earlier designated as Tracer and the qualification of Certificate of Draftsman (Civil) from an Industrial Training Institute was not stipulated as a condition precedent for appointment to the post of Tracer. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, that when persons earlier inducted in the service of respondents as Tracer, who have now been designated as Junior Draftsmen acquire 12 years experience of working as Junior Draftsman, they are eligible for promotion to the post of Draftsman, as per the conditions stipulated in the Appendix to the 2001 Rules, even though they do not possess the qualification of two years Certificate of Draftsman (Civil) from an Industrial Training Institute. We do not find the aforesaid contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner attractive, on account of the fact, that a Tracer as per the qualification stipulated before the enforcement of 2001 Rules, having a certificate of Draftsman (Civil) from an Industrial Training Institute was eligible for promotion to the post of Draftsman, on acquiring two years experience as such, whereas under the 2001 Rules, a Junior Draftsman becomes eligible for promotion to the post of Draftsman only after acquiring an experience of 12 years. Reference in this behalf may be made to the Punjab Department of Public Works (Public Health Branch) Draftsmen and Tracers (Class-III) Service Rules, 1988, which have been extracted in paragraph 14 of the writ petition.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.