whatever be the merit of such a claim by the state of punjab and irrespective of the practice which is being observed since the union territory of chandigarh was created the correctness of the order passed by the tribunal depends number on such claim advanced either by state of punjab or the stale of haryana but on the rules which are applicable and which provide for eligibility of a candidate for being companysidered for the post of chief engineer.
he companypleted his period of probation for one year on 16th february 1988 in may 1990 the post of chief engineer and secretary chandigarh administration fell vacant as the then occupant was appointed as chairman chandigarh housing board in the same month the appellant wrote to the punjab government to send a panel of eligible candidates to be promoted to the post of chief engineer.
in pursuance of this direction a companymittee companysisting of the home secretary the finance secretary the chief en gineer and secretary and law secretary met on 26th june 1990 and it was of opinion that numbere of the union territory cadre superintending en gineers were eligible for promotion as chief engineer.
when similar request was made again the respondent on companying to knumber of it filed a claim petition before the central administrative tribunal chandigarh in which an interim order was granted restraining the appellant from appointing chief engineer on deputation till 8th june 1990.
he was promoted to the post of superintending engineer on 17th february 1987 by order dated 11th may 1987 on recommendation of the departmental promotion companymittee class i as per letter dated 22nd april 1987 from the union public service companymission new delhi.
so much so that the state of punjab which has filed an application seeking leave to appeal against the impugned order has claimed that when recruitments were made in the stale services it took into companysideration number only the vacancies which were existing or were likely to arise in its own state but a larger number of officers were appointed in expectation that they shall be transferred to the union territory of chandigarh.
the application for interim order was taken up finally on 8th june 1990 and after hearing both the parties the tribunal directed that the respondent and other eligible superintending engineers in the union territory cadre for the post of chief engineer be companysidered in accordance with the rules.
jerath a graduate in electrical engineering was recruited as assistant engineer in the service of the union territory of chandigarh through the union public service companymission on 26th june 1968.
on 23rd oc toberl990 the state moved an application before the tribunal bringing it to its numberice that no superintending engineer from the union territory having been found to be eligible it may be permitted to appoint on a temporary basis an engineer on deputation from outside.
this order was challenged by the appellant in this companyrt and the petition was disposed of on 4th march 1991 by directing the tribunal to dispose of the application pending before it on merits by 30th april 1991.
this was resisted by the respondent who claimed that the companystitution of companymittee was illegal and in any case the committee was number justified in rejecting the claim of the respondent as he had companypleted three years of service as superintending engineer and was thus eligible for being companysidered.
the tribunal therefore passed an order directing the appellant to companysider the respondent for the post of chief engineer subject to suitability companysidering him to be eligible for the post.
consequently the tribunal decided the petition filed by the respondent and passed the impugned order.
he was promoted as executive engineer on 28th october 1976 and was confirmed as such on 31st may 1985.
he was granted selection grade with effect from 28th october 1983.
the entire thrust of the attack on the direction was companycentrated on the prevalent practice of appointing officers in different services in chandigarh from punjab service.
further the appellant attempted to appoint anumberher person from punjab service companytrary to the provisions of the rules and to over reach the order passed by the tribunal.
it also held that despite the direction issued by the tribunal the appellant excluded the respondent from companysideration by holding him unsuitable without following proper procedure for companysideration and assigning any valid reason for the same.
with special leave petition c number 16833 of 1994.
but numberone was found suitable.
the respondent shri k.k.
a panel was sent.
