Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 / 8 2025:CGHC:7473 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8336 of 2024 1 - Irfan Sultan S/o Late Shri Sheikh Sultan Aged About 54 Years Working In The Post Of Field Assistant, Public Works Department, Raipur R/o Near Swastik Bakery, Baijnath Para, Raipur - 492001, District Raipur, C.G. 2 - Santosh Kumar Upadhyay S/o Late Shri Loknath Upadhyay Aged About 55 Years Working In The Post Of Field Assistant, Public Works Department, Balod R/o L I G - 514, Near Om Kaleshwar Mandir, Padhmanabhpur, Durg- 491001, District- Durg, C.G. 3 - Vijay Singh Rajput S/o Late Shri M. S. Rajput Aged About 60 Years Working In The Post Of Field Assistant, Public Works Department, Bilaspur, R/o H1/12, Nutan Colony, Sarkanda, Bilaspur- 495001, District Bilaspur, C.G.
Legal Reasoning
Bench of this Court in the case of Suneel Kumar Pandhare Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. (WPS No.1326 of 2014, decided on 03.04.2024) relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Institution of Mechanical Engineers (India) Vs. State 7 / 8 of Punjab and Ors. (2019) 16 SCC 95, Memorandum dated 06.12.2012, has observed thus:- “15. The Supreme Court has also declared that degree of candidate enrolled upto 31.05.2013 is perfectly valid. Therefore, the said judgment was judgment-in-rem which has adjudicated upon the issue which has now become the law of land and consequently binding upon all the administrative authority as also upon this Court. 16. Applying the well settled principles of law to the facts of the present case, it is manifest that the petitioner obtained the certificate prior to 31-5-2013 from the Institution of Civil Co Engineers (India), Ludhiana (Punjab), which was enveloped in of Chhattisgarrient with a cut off date, and, as such, the petitioner would be covered within the exception, which is carved out by the asp Supreme Court in extending the benefit of notification dated 6-12- 2012, which puts a barrier for the students who are enrolled prior to 31-5-2013. Thus, the petitioner, who obtained such certificate within cut off date from the institution which was recognised for limited purpose with a barrier of cut off date, was entitled to the benefit to consider him to be holder of recognised degree. The process of promotion took place in the year 2014, therefore, the petitioner could not have been deprived of the right having been created in his favour. In view of peculiar facts, it is directed that, though the petitioner promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer in the year 2023, he would be entitled to all consequential benefits from 22-1-2014, the date on which the similarly situated persons were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer.
Arguments
4 - Rajkumar Agrawal S/o Late Shri M.L. Agrawal Aged About 52 Years Working In The Post Of Field Assistant, Public Works Department, Bilaspur, R/o Krishna Residency, A/204, Mungeli Road, Bilaspur- 495001, District Bilaspur, C.G. 5 - Mahendra Gautam S/o Late Shri Uma Shanker Yadav Aged About 46 Years Working In The Post Of Field Assistant, Public Works Department, Bilaspur, R/o Arvind Marg, Sepat Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur- 495001, District Bilaspur, C.G. 6 - Ashok Tiwari S/o Late Shri Narendra Kumar Tiwari Aged About 55 Years Working In The Post Of Field Assistant, Public Works Department, Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2025.02.20 11:23:06 +0530 2 / 8 Rajnandgaon R/o Sana City, A/18, Ward No. 45, Rajnandgaon- 491441, District Rajnandgaon, C.G. 7 - Mahendra Pandey S/o Deenbandhu Pandey Aged About 59 Years Working In The Post Of Field Assistant, Public Works Department, Jagdalpur R/o- Atal Bihari Ward, Dharampura No. 1, Jagdalpur- 494001, District Bastar, C.G. 8 - Purshottam Panigrahi S/o Late Shri L S Panigrahi Aged About 59 Years Working In The Post Of Field Assistant, Public Works Department, Jagdalpur R/o- Village Post Asna, Jagdalpur- 494221, District Bastar, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, C.G. 2 - The Director Directorate Of Training Skill Development, Technical Education, Employment And Training Department Indrawati Bhawan, Block- 4, First Floor, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur District - Raipur, C.G. 3 - The Chief Engineer Public Works Department, North Block, Sector- 19, Nirman Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, C.G. 4 - All India Council For Technical Education Through The Member Secretary, Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners For State/Resp. No. 1 to 3 : Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.4 : Ms. Ayushi Agrawal, Advocate : Mr. Ajit Singh, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 12/02/2025 Heard. 1. Petitioners are aggrieved by the illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory act of respondent authorities by which they are not being considered for promotion to the post of Sub Engineer though in identical cases, orders have been passed by this Court issuing a direction to consider 3 / 8 the cases of similarly situated persons for grant of promotion to the post of Sub Engineer. It is the case of the petitioners that even though respondent authorities were apprised of the said identical orders but without there being any reason they are discriminating the case of petitioners while granting promotion to the other similarly situated persons. 2. By way of this petition, petitioners have prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 To set aside and quash the impugned order dated 27.11.2024 (Annexure P/1). 10.2 To direct the respondents to grant promotion to the Petitioners to the post of Sub- Engineers, at par with the other similarly placed personnel while acknowledging the Diploma in Civil Engineering obtained by the Petitioners from the Institution of Civil Engineer (India), Ludhiyana, Punjab as valid. 10.3 To direct the respondents to grant all consequential benefits to the petitioners since the date of their entitled to the post of Sub- Engineer. 10.4 To grant any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case along with costs of the petition.” 3. It is the case of petitioners that they are eligible for promotion in all respects akin to other similarly situated employees who have been promoted to the post of Sub Engineer. All the petitioners are working on the post of Site Assistant in the Public Works Department, description of them is as under :- S.No. Name Present Place of Posting Date of Initial Appointment/ Joining 1. 2. Irfan Sultan Office of Executive Engineer, PWD Division No.2-Raipur 06.01.1994 Santosh Kumar Upadhyay Office of Executive Engineer, PWD Balod (attached at SDO, PWD No.3, Durg) 08.12.1993 4 / 8 3. 4. 5. 6. Vijay Singh Rajput Office of Executive Engineer, PWD Division No.1, Bilaspur 14.02.2005 Rajkumar Agrawal Office of Executive Engineer, PWD Division No.1, Bilaspur 29.06.1999 Mahendra Gautam Office of Executive Engineer PWD Division No.1 Bilaspur 09.06.2006 Ashok Tiwari Office of Executive Engineer, PWD Rajnandgaon Division, Rajnandgaon 30.10.1993 7. Mahendra Pandey Office of Executive Engineer, 24.01.2011 PWD Division No.2, Jagdalpur 8. Purshottam Panigrahi Office of Executive Engineer, PWD Division No.1, Jagdalpur 04.11.1995 4. It is the further case of petitioners that most of them are working since 1993 and 1995. The petitioners have worked more than 30 years and they have discharged their duties with all sincerity and devotion. While in service, with due permission of the department, they have pursued and obtained Technician Engineers Membership (T. Engg.) in Civil Engineering from the Institution of Civil Engineer (India) Ludhiyana, Punjab (A Govt. of India Recognized Degree Level Institution). The degree of the said Institution is recognized by all over India. The petitioners successfully completed their Diploma in Civil Engineering from the above Institution. According to Public Works Department (Non-Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules of 2015”), 5% posts of Sub Engineer shall be reserved for employees having Diploma in Civil or equivalent Engineering. An Office Memorandum dated 06.12.2012 has also been issued by the Govt. of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education recognizing 5 / 8 “Institution of Civil Engineers, Ludhiana (Pb.)” i.e. the Institution from which petitioners have obtained Diploma in Civil Engineering. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in WPC No.945/2013 [The Institution of Civil Engineers (India) Vs. Union of India & Anr.] as well as this Court has passed several identical orders while directing respondent authority to consider the case of likewise petitioners for promotion to the post of Sub Engineer granting similar relief as claimed by petitioners herein for grant of promotion against 5% posts of Sub -Engineer reserved for employees having Diploma in Civil or equivalent Engineering. Direction has been issued to respondent authority to consider the case of likewise employees who were seeking promotion as Sub Engineer and accordingly most of the likewise persons have been granted promotion to the post of Sub Engineer. However, inspite of furnishing proper information respondents are not considering case of petitioners for grant of promotion on the post of Sub Engineer without any justiciable reason, as such, petitioners have filed this petition seeking reliefs as mentioned in para-2 of this order. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that several orders have been passed in identical cases in which the case of the petitioners have been considered and they were granted promotion to the post of Sub Engineer. Petitioners also stand on same footing and akin to other employees. They are entitled to be promoted to the post of Sub Engineer. However, without any rhyme or reason, the petitioners are not being promoted and while doing so, respondent authorities are in fact violating the Articles 14, 16, 19 of the Constitution of India as there appears to be apparent discrimination committed by the respondent authority. In identical and similar situation, employees 6 / 8 have been granted promotion to the post of Sub Engineers, as such, necessary orders may be passed directing respondent authority to consider case of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in respect of their promotion. 6. Learned counsel for the State though opposes submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners but upon query he has admitted this fact that similarly situated persons have been granted promotion and the case of the petitioners are also on same footing. However, he submits that perhaps due to administrative exigency the petitioners could not be promoted. He submits that respondents will take all endeavour to promote the petitioners on the post of Sub Engineer and so far as the allegation of discrimination is concerned, the authorities are not discriminating the petitioners. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the entire documents annexed with this writ petition. 8. From perusal of the documents annexed along with this writ petition as also orders passed by Delhi High Court as well as this Court and the Rules of 2015, I do not find any reason why the case of the petitioners could not be considered for promotion to the post of Sub - Engineer. Decisions which are relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioners as referred to above are in fact identical. Coordinate
Decision
17. In the result, the writ petition is allowed, leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s).” 9. In view of the aforesaid discussions, I am in the fortified view that the case of the petitioners is identical to those persons who have been considered and extended benefit of promotion on the post of Sub Engineer. Therefore, without deviating further, this writ petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent authorities to consider the case of each of the petitioner for grant of promotion to the post of Sub 8 / 8 Engineer in the light of order passed by this Court as referred to above. 10.This exercise shall be done by the respondent authorities within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Praveen Sd/Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad ) Judge