Jagdeep Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others

CWP-22168-2016 -12023:PHHC:162872

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-22168-2016 Date of Decision : 19.12.2023 Jagdeep Singh ......... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present :

Mr.Dhiraj Chawla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Inderpreet Singh Kang, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. G.S.Bal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Lovepreet Kaur, Advocate for respondents No.14, 15, 18 and 19.

Respondents No.4 to 13, 16, 17, 20 and 21 exparte. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL , J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of amended seniority list 23.07.2016 (Annexure P-9).

2.

On 15.03.2023, the following order was passed : "Ld. Senior Counsel appearing for the private respondents would submit that as per the facts raised in the pleadings the petitioner himself given his date of promotion as Inspector to be 12th of May, 2011. As per the relevant Rules to be considered for promotion as Deputy Superintendent of Police is required to complete 6 years service as Inspector but the petitioner retired on 31st of December, 2016 on attaining Anju Goel 2023.12.19 15:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-22168-2016 -22023:PHHC:162872 age of superranuation i.e. 58 years (though he was granted extension for further 2 years) thus, the whole of the exercise will be merely academic in nature.

Mr. Chawla prays for time to seek instructions.

On his request, adjourned to 14.11.2023."

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that juniors of the petitioner in the revised seniority list have been placed at senior position. In support of his contention, he pointed out case of Karam Singh i.e. private respondent No.4.

4.

Learned State counsel in reply to contention of learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that Karam Singh was appointed as ASI on 03.12.1986 whereas petitioner joined Force as Constable and he was appointed as ASI on 03.03.1989, thus, the petitioner cannot claim seniority from Karam Singh.

5.

This Court from the perusal of record, especially, in view of the fact that the petitioner is not assailing parameters laid down by committee while preparing seniority list, does not find any infirmity in the impugned order warranting interference of this Court. 6.

Dismissed.

( JAGMOHAN BANSAL ) 19.12.2023 JUDGE anju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Anju Goel 2023.12.19 15:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh