news details |
|
|
| HC dismisses petition seeking promotion of foreman | | |
EARLY TIMES REPORT
Jammu, Mar 26: Justice JP Singh of J&K High Court in a petition filed by one Naresh Kumar seeking promotion on the post of foreman in the State Health Transport Organization, has dismissed the petitions found to be misconceived and without merit.
Petitioner a pump mechanic in the state Malariologist office was ordered to be adjusted as foreman in his own pay grade against the vacancy until necessary formalities as provided under rules in respect of filling-up the posts were completed vide director Health Services communication dated July 9, 1986. It was indicated that the petitioner would not claim any superior lien at the time of selection to the post by the competent authority.
This order challenged by the petition in a petition in the year 1986 and thereafter filed so many writ petitions and ultimately filed writ petition in the year 2004 and 2005 which were listed before the Justice JP Singh. Justice JP Singh after hearing Sr. Adv SS Lehar with Advocate Meharban Singh appeared for the petitioner and Deputy AG S Hakim appeared for the state and Advocate SK Anand appeared for the private respondents referred various judgments of the Supreme Court and High Court, observed that the order passed by the Director Health Services Jammu that putting the petitioner over the head of the superior staff having superior status and rank in SHTO as Foreman by skipping over three-four steps promotion was not justified, admittedly because both the organizations had their own seniority and promotion prospects and an employee born on one organization under law was disabled for consideration for promotion/regularization in other dept cannot thus in view of the legal position be faulted as the petitioner having no right to the post of foreman in SHTO as disentitled to maintain his writ petitions seeking directions against the respondents challenging their orders and arrangement devised for adjustment/promotion against the post of foreman. Petitioner's representation to his parent organization does not violate any fundamental, legal or statutory right of the petitioners justifying exercise of extra ordinary writ jurisdiction. With these observations Court dismissed both the petitions found to be misconceived and without merit. --JNF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
