Pratap Singh vs State Of Delhi And Anr.
2013 Latest Caselaw 553 Del

*              IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                           WP(C) No.3997/1997

%                                                            February 05, 2013
PRATAP SINGH                                     ..... Petitioner
                            Through:     None.

                            versus

STATE OF DELHI AND ANR.                                ..... Respondents

                  Through:               None.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

    To be referred to the Reporter or not?


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1. This case is on the Regular Board of this Court since

2.1.2013. Today the matter is effective item No.7 on the Regular Board.

No one appears for the petitioner although it is 12.40 P.M.

2. By this writ petition, the petitioner prays for grant of

promotion by the respondent No.2/Delhi Vidyut Board. The claim for

promotion is on the basis of earlier services of the petitioner from the

year 1973 to 1980 with the earlier employer namely Haryana Dairy

Development Co-operative Federation. The petitioner joined the

respondent No.2 as Peon in 1980.

3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent No.2 in

which it is stated that the petitioner cannot derive any benefits of service

with the previous employer inasmuch as the appointment of the petitioner

with the respondent No.2 was an independent appointment and not routed

through the earlier employer. Reference is also made to the Government

of India's decision dated 31.3.1992 that those persons who while holding

temporary posts under the State/Central Government apply directly

without permission of the administrative authority concerned and resign

their previous posts to join the next appointment under State/Central

Government, they are not entitled to seek benefits of combined services.

4. In view of the above, there is no merit in the petition and the

petitioner cannot be granted promotion inasmuch as his services with the

previous employer from 1973 to 1980 cannot be counted. If the services

are not counted, the petitioner will not be liable to promotion.

5. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J FEBRUARY 05, 2013 Ne