Service Law – Promotion – Maintenance of lien in previous cadre – Entitlement to promotion and additional benefits – Interpretation of Recruitment and Promotion Rules – Equivalence of posts – Termination of lien – Exercise of option for promotion
The petitioners approached the court seeking to quash and set aside their posting as Booking Clerks by transfer and subsequent orders, demanding maintenance of their lien in the cadre/category of Conductors. They sought restoration of their names in the seniority list of Conductors and entitlement to promotional benefits.
The respondents failed to maintain the petitioners’ lien in the cadre/category of Conductors after posting them as Booking Clerks by transfer, depriving them of promotion to the post of Inspector and two additional increments granted to Conductors.
The service records of the petitioners reveal that they were serving as Conductors prior to being posted as Booking Clerks by transfer in November/December 2013. Recruitment and Promotion Rules (R&P Rules) for the post of Booking Clerk were amended to allow 100% recruitment by transfer from Adda Conductors/Conductors based on seniority.
The petitioners had willingly submitted to be posted as Booking Clerks by transfer in response to communications dated 23.8.2011 and 17.10.2011. Despite the petitioners’ placement as Booking Clerks, subsequent promotions to the posts of Inspectors excluded them, and a separate seniority list for Booking Clerks was issued.
The petitioners contended that their posting as Booking Clerks did not terminate their lien to the Conductor post as it was neither appointment nor promotion but placement on an equivalent post.
The court emphasized the distinction between “transfer” and “recruitment by transfer,” asserting that the petitioners’ posting as Booking Clerks constituted a transfer simpliciter, not recruitment, and did not terminate their lien to the Conductor post.
Respondents’ argument that the petitioners exercised an option for promotion to Booking Clerks was dismissed as the post of Booking Clerks was not a promotional post but an equivalent one available for transfer/placement.The court held that peculiar facts and circumstances, along with precedents, supported the petitioners’ entitlement to maintain their lien to the Conductor post and inclusion in the seniority list of Conductors.
In light of previous decisions and the merits of the case, the court directed the respondents to include the petitioners in the seniority list of Conductors and extend all consequential benefits within one month. The court suggested a review of the R&P Rules by the Corporation to provide fair treatment to all employees and avoid litigation in the future. (Para14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24)
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
2023 STPL(Web) 296 HP
[2023 HHC 12955]
Parkash Chand & Others Vs. Hrtc & Another
CWPOA No. 5992 of 2020-Decided on 4-11-2023
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2023-STPLWeb-296-HP.pdf
