Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Adityajit Singh Chadha, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Teevar Sharma, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Jigerjeet Singh, Advocate for Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Namit Kumar J.

The petitioner-Punjab State Power Corporation Limited has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 02.02.2022 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No.l-Punjab State Scheduled Caste Commission, Chandigarh (herein after referred as 'the Commission'), whereby it has been directed that respondent No.2 is liable to be promoted as Senior Executive Engineer.

2. The brief facts, as have been pleaded in the petition, are that respondent No.2-Surinder Pal (retired Assistant Executive Engineer) was initially appointed as Junior Engineer (Electrical) by way of direct recruitment in the year 1985 against a reserved vacancy. Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer by seeking the benefit of reservation in promotion. Next avenue of promotion from the post of Assistant Executive Engineer is to the post of Senior Executive Engineer. Although, he was not in the zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Senior Executive Engineer, however, vide complaint dated 01.04.2021, he approached respondent No.l-the Commission for redressal of his grievance, wherein he had requested that inspite of the facts and circumstances in his favour, he is being denied his right for promotion to the post of Senior Executive Engineer. On the complaint of respondent No.2, the report was sought from the petitioner-Corporation by the Commission vide letter dated 05.05.202L The report was submitted by the petitionerCorporation vide letter dated 26.05.202E Thereafter, respondent No.2 submitted his replication dated 09.08.202E A report was again sought from the petitioner-Corporation by the Commission on the said replication which was given by it vide letter dated 09.11.202 E The respondent No. 2 has also approached this Court by filing CWP No.9684 of 2021 (Surinder Pal Vs. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others) inter alia, seeking direction to the Corporation to consider his candidature for promotion to the post of Senior Executive Engineer. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 28.06.2021 by observing as under :-

"Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that for the relief which is being claimed in the present writ petition, the petitioner has already submitted representations dated 17.10.2020 (Annexure P/9) and 04.02.2021 (Annexure P/10) to the respondents, which are still pending consideration with the respondents and the petitioner will be satisfied, at this stage, in case a time bound direction is issued to respondent No.2 to decide the said representations by passing an appropriate speaking order.

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the claim being made by the petitioner, respondent No.2 is directed to decide representations dated 17.10.2020 (Annexure P/9) and 04.02.2021 (Annexure P/10), submitted by the petitioner by passing a speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Present writ petition stands disposed of. "

3. In compliance thereto, the petitioner-Corporation passed a speaking order dated 24.08.2021, declining the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Senior Executive Engineer. The said speaking order was never challenged by the petitioner before this Court. However, he pursued his complaint before the Commission and on the said complaint, the following order dated 02.02.2022 (wrongly mentioned as 02.02.2021 in the order) was passed by the Commission

"xx xx xx xx xx

After examining the complaint-reply of the complainant, departmental letters submitted by the Department to the Commission from time to time, the Commission observes as under:-

In view of all the above facts, the Commission opines that injustice has been done to the complainant. His status was lowered and he has suffered financial losses. The Commission wan