Harnek Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 14806 P&H

                                                          Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115314




CWP-17831-1996 (O&M)                     -1-            2023:PHHC:115314

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

369                                              CWP-17831-1996 (O&M)
                                                 Date of Decision: 01.09.2023


Harnek Singh                                                .... Petitioner

                                 Versus

State of Punjab and others                                  .... Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA


Present:     None for the petitioner.

             Mr. D.K. Singal, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

                                     *****

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J (ORAL)

1. The petitioner by way of this writ petition prays to be

considered for promotion to the post of Block Primary Education Officer

from the date his juniors have been considered.

2. No one is present on behalf of the petitioner. This matter

pertaining to the year 1996 and therefore, has been taken up for hearing

today.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to Scheduled Caste

category. The name of the petitioner figures at serial No.5 in the seniority

list of the Central Head Teacher as on 01.01.1995 whereas the name of Ram

Chand figures at serial No.6 as he is junior to the petitioner and joined as

Central Head Teacher on 03.04.1993. But Ram Chand has been promoted as

Block Primary Education Officer and Shivji Ram has also been promoted as

Block Primary Education Officer, although, both of them had joined later

than the petitioner as Central Head Teacher.

                                        1 of 4

                                                             Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115314




CWP-17831-1996 (O&M)                     -2-              2023:PHHC:115314

4. It is the case of the petitioner that he was promoted and joined

as Central Head Teacher on 04.11.1992. The respondents have stated that

the petitioner belonging to SC category is not entitled to accelerate

consequential seniority because he has already got benefit of reservation

twice firstly from JBT teacher to Head Teacher and secondly, from Head

Teacher to Central Head Teacher on the basis of reservation quota for SC

and attained accelerated promotion. The petitioner, therefore, could not

have been given accelerated consequential seniority and promoted as Block

Primary Education Officer. Moreso, as the SC quota stood already

exhausted on the post of Block Primary Education Officer. It is stated that

the present sanctioned strength of Block Primary Education Officer is five.

Three for men and two for women. The ration is 60-40. Out of three

sanctioned post of Block Primary Education Officer, one post was already

occupied by SC candidate. It is further stated that the promotion for the post

of Block Primary Education Officer was made on the basis of seniority

position of JBT cadre where the petitioner figures at serial No.727 while

respondents No.4 and 5 figure at serial No.220 and 235 respectively. The

petitioner was therefore not entitled for promotion as Block Primary

Education Officer.

5. The reply has also been filed by the private respondents who

have also reiterated the same position and have relied upon a judgment

passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajit Singh Januja Vs.

State of Punjab, AIR 1996 SC 1189, to submit that the persons who have

promoted from reserved category would not carry their seniority on the basis

of higher promotion. In other words, accelerated seniority cannot be granted

to the said persons.

6. I have considered the submissions.

                                        2 of 4

                                                           Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115314




CWP-17831-1996 (O&M)                   -3-              2023:PHHC:115314

7. The petitioner admittedly was junior to the respondents in the

cadre of JBT. However, from the post of JBT, the petitioner being from

reserved category, was promoted earlier to the post of Head Teacher and

thereafter, from the cadre of Head Teacher, he was further promoted to the

post of Central Head Teacher prior to the respondents. In the seniority list of

Central Head Teacher, the petitioner has been placed above the respondents

as noted above.

8. So far as promotion for the post of Block Primary Education

Officer is concerned, the same is to be done from the Central Head Teachers.

Thus, the action of the respondents in considering the seniority of the JBT

teachers for the purpose of making promotion to the post of Block Primary

Education Officer is found to be illegal. The inter se seniority of only

Central Head Teachers was required to be taken into consideration. If the

inter se seniority of the Central Head Teacher is taken into consideration, the

petitioner who was senior to the respondents were required to be promoted

first. Even if he was from SC category, he would be promoted earlier

against a general quota post being senior to the other general category

persons, as it is a settled law that even against General seat, a Scheduled

Caste person or a reserved category person would be considered and

promoted and thereafter if still there is any reserved category post lying

vacant, then any other second or third reserved category person would be

promoted against the said post. It is not that the reserved category person

would only fill a post which falls vacant against the reserved seat. The

principle has been well established now after a Constitutional Bench

judgment passed in the case of R.K. Sabharwal Vs. State of Punjab,

1995(2) SCC 745. The said judgment has been recently again examined by

the Apex Court in the case of Saurav Yadav and others Vs. State of Uttar

3 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115314

CWP-17831-1996 (O&M) -4- 2023:PHHC:115314

Pradesh and others, 2021(4) SCC 542, wherein the Apex Court has further

clarified that as and when posts are to be filled first upon the general post

shall be filled from all the senior persons according to the merit. The similar

procedure is to be followed in promotions too.

9. Keeping in view the aforesaid findings, the present petition is

allowed. The petitioner shall be granted promotion to the post of Block

Primary Education Officer from the date his juniors have been so promoted

i.e. on 01.10.1996.

10. Since this writ petition is decided after a period of almost 27

years and the respondents have continued to remain on the higher post, no

case for reversion of the persons already promoted is made out nor any such

directions are being issued. However, the individual benefit to the petitioner

shall be granted by creating a supernumerary post from the same date which

the petitioner ought to have been granted. The respondents shall now give

all consequential benefits to the petitioner accordingly. The compliance

shall be made within a period of four months from today.

                                       (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)
01.09.2023                                      JUDGE
D.Bansal

             Whether speaking/reasoned :       Yes/No
             Whether reportable        :       Yes/No




                                                          Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115314

                                      4 of 4