Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sahdev Malik vs State Of Haryana And Others on 9 April, 2024
Author: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri
Bench: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048720
CWP-14383 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:048720 1
227
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-14383 of 2020 (O&M)
Date of decision : April 9, 2024
Sahdev Malik
...... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ......Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI
***
Present :-Mr. Sunil K. Nehra, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Kapil Bansal, DAG., Haryana.
Mr. Rajesh Gaur, Advocate
for respondent No.3.
***
JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J (Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the
Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus
directing the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of Leading
Fireman and Assistant Fire Station Officer/Sub Fire Officer under the
Haryana Municipal Services (Integration, Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, 1982.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel
have stated that competent Department in the present case is Fire and
Emergency Services being a newly created department.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on his oral
request the aforesaid department be impleaded as respondent No.5.
Learned counsel for respondent No.3 and learned State counsel have stated
that they have no objection with regard to same. In view of the above, the
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048720
Director Fire and Emergency Services department is impleaded as
respondent No.5. The Registry is directed to carry out the necessary
corrections in the Memo of Parties.
4. The short point involved in the present case is that the
petitioner was appointed as a Fireman by respondent No.3- Municipal
Corporation, Gurugram and thereafter his services were regularized by the
office of the Municipal Corporation, Gurugram vide order dated
18.01.1994 (Annexure R-1). Thereafter vide order dated 23.06.1995
(Annexure P-4) he was transferred to Municipal Corporation, Sonepat by
an order passed by Director Local Bodies, Haryana. Thereafter, he
continued to serve the aforesaid Municipal Corporation, Sonepat.
However, Municipal Corporation, Gurugram started promoting the other
Firemen who, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, were junior
to him and the petitioner was not put in the seniority list since he was
earlier transferred vide order dated 23.06.1995 (Annexure P-4) to
Municipal Corporation, Sonepat.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted
that the aforesaid transfer order dated 23.06.1995 (Annexure P-4) was not
at the instance of the petitioner but it was by way of an order of transfer
passed by the Director Local Bodies and as a consequence of the same he
was working in the aforesaid office of the Municipal Corporation, Sonepat
but his lien still remained at Municipal Corporation, Gurugram since the
same was never extinguished and when the juniors or any other equivalent
staff members were to be considered for promotion then the right of the
petitioner for getting promotion was also subsisting and he could not have
been ignored in this regard.
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048720
6. He submitted that he has not even been promoted in the
existing Municipal Corporation, Sonepat. He further submitted that
thereafter the Government of Haryana notified The Haryana Fire Service
(Group-C) Rules, 2016 and as per respondents now State level seniority
list is to be maintained but he does not appear any where. In this way
prejudice has been caused to the service of the petitioner where his right
for being considered for promotion has been prejudiced. He referred to the
Full Bench judgment of this Court in Niranjan Singh Vs. State of Punjab
1999 (3) SLR 749 to contend that the lien of a government servant who is
subsequently appointed to a post in cadre cannot be terminated unilaterally
by an act of transfer to another cadre. He submitted that the right of the
petitioner for being considered for being promoted cannot be jeopardised
only because of an action of transfer which was affected by the Director,
Local Bodies.
7. On the other hand, Mr. Rajesh Gaur, Advocate appearing on
behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Gurugram submitted that once the
petitioner stood transferred to Sonepat the promotions were required to be
effected only on those officers and those Firemen who were on duty at
Gurugram, and therefore, the Municipal Corporation, Gurugram has not
committed any illegality.
8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the
considered view that present petition can be disposed of with a direction to
the Director, Fire and Emergency Services-newly added respondent No.5.
He is directed to look into this matter himself and considering the right of
the petitioner for being considered for promotion to a higher post when the
other equivalent or junior Firemen are stated to have been promoted in the
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048720
Corporation where he had a lien by passing a speaking order and also in
the light of the settled principle of law including the aforesaid Full Bench
Judgment of this Court in Niranjan Singh's case (supra) of this Court.
9. Needless to say that the petitioner or his counsel shall be
afforded an opportunity of hearing before passing an order. The entire
exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from today.
10. In case, the petitioner is aggrieved by any adverse order passed
by the respondents he shall be at liberty to challenge the same in
accordance with law.
April 9, 2024 ( JASGURPREET SINGH PURI)
archana JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether Reportable : No
4 of 4
