High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/11583/2022disposed of

Jatinder Singh Sidhu v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. And ORS

2023-05-15Mr. Justice Pankaj Jain7 pages

(252)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 15.05.2023 Jatinder Singh Sidhu ....Petitioner

Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Mr. D.S. Rawat, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate for the respondents.

***** PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) By way of this writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned letter/order dated 07th of April, 2022 (Annexure P-8), whereby the claim of the petitioners for deemed date of appointment on the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) as 17.05.2010 (i.e. the date on which 1st Junior Engineer (Electrical) of advertisement CRA No.264/2008 joined the respondent-Corporation), stands rejected. 2.

The respondent-Corporation vide public notice bearing CRANo.264/2008, invited applications for recruitment of 225 posts of Junior Engineer (Electrical). The petitioner being eligible participated in the selection process and was placed in merit after securing 72 marks. On the other hand, respondent No.4, namely, Priya Kant also secured 72 marks, but since the petitioner was older in age than respondent No.4-Priya Kant in the

-2original seniority list of Junior Engineer (Electrical) dated 30.06.2014, she was placed below the petitioner in the merit list. Pursuant to the selection, the candidates were appointed in different zones. The Zones allowed them to join on different dates and they were deemed to be in service from those dates. This led to jumbling of seniority list and a situation was created wherein a candidate though is in merit was deemed to be in service on the date when he got appointment in his zone, which in many cases was later in time to the person who was lower in merit, but was allowed to join earlier in time.

One of the matters came before this Court in CWP No.22762 of 2016 titled as 'Amrinder Singh Virk and others VS. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & others', which was decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 19.11.2020. The relevant extract of the said judgment read as under:- "

# $

% $

( )

)

# #$

+ ,#* --$

$ $$ $.

-3- /* --0(

, # $

, , &

#$ &

2$ &

, &

&, $

% &

&, $

% 3 4$

* --

&, 5

$ 6 ! -7"

9 9

, 8

:- -7(

& 9

;

, &

, 6 < - "

0! &

$ * # $ ,

$ , 4

* & 4 ,

# $

% *

& = $ #

#5 - < 5

- -:

6 5

, " & $ &,?

(

@( A , # -6 (*% 6<!4

# A , (( *

-4-

( A , %

, -:!:" &

# $

, ;

# # $ $

# #$ $

$$ B"

# ?

(

$.0 /- 4

&, *

, -:!:#&

# , $

# ,

* 9

$ , &

" 1

# &

$ ,

$ #

& $

* ?

# *

& #

888 888 88 -6%

,$ , $

# ,# " C (

-5-

# ,

$ ?

3 "

9 9

, 8

& #

, 1

# & ,

- * 4 %

, 6 < - "

0!9

9 *

, 1

3 3.

Pursuant to the aforesaid judgment, the respondents though have revised the seniority list but have granted benefit only to the petitioners in the said writ petition which has further complex the situation rather than resolving the same.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of this Court to the marks obtained by respondent No.4 and that by the petitioner

-6and submit yet owing to latter date of joining, the petitioner has been rendered junior to respondent No.4 5.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the aforesaid factual position being borne from the record. However asserts that the fresh seniority list stands casted pursuant to judgment passed in CWP No. 22762 of 2016 and, thus, cannot be faulted with. 6.

I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through records of the case.

The respondent-corporation has completely misread the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.22762 of 2016 passed in 'Amrinder Singh Virk's case (supra). The ratio in the said judgment is that the Corporation being at fault in assigning different joining dates to the candidates cannot allow the covenant contained in the appointment letter governing seniority to be diluted and, thus, leading to ignoring the merit. Mandate was not only to assign deemed date of appointment to the petitioner in that case but was also to pass fresh seniority list in the cadre of Assistant Engineers (Electrical) be prepared thereafter in accordance with law. Once that was the mandate, Corporation ought to have drawn fresh seniority list in accordance with the provisions contained in the regulations along with those contained in the appointment letter (Annexure P-1) to the following effect:- 11.

"Seniority of those candidates, whose seniority is yet to be determined, will not be entitled for seniority on account of earlier joining. You will not be entitled seniority on the basis of earlier

-7joining. Your seniority and seniority of other candidates will be decided by the Powercom/Transcom on the basis of merit decided by Powercom/Transcom."

In view of the above, the present writ petition is allowed. Impugned dated 07th of April, 2022 (Annexure P-8), is ordered to be quashed.

Respondents are directed to carry out necessary exercise and to re-cast the seniority list within a period of 04 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with the merit in the recruitment process as contemplated under aforesaid clause. 10.

Needless to observe that any candidate who joined beyond the time granted by the respondent-Corporation, will be granted date of appointment from the date he/she joined services. May 15, 2023 (Pankaj Jain) Anjal Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No