2026:HHC:8604 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWPOA No.2732 of 2019 Reserved on: 03 rd March, 2026 Decided: 24 th March, 2026 ___________________________________________________________________ Jugendra Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another ...Respondents _____________________________________________________________________ Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 Yes For the petitioner: Mr. Hamender Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rupinder Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) The petitioner by way of the present petition has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:- “i) That the action of the respondents whereby the petitioner has been denied complete bene昀椀ts 昀氀owing out of noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000, Annexure P-12 may be held illegal; ii) That the respondents may be directed to implement the noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000, Annexure P-12 in its letter and spirit and petitioner may be granted consequential 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 promotions to the post of Deputy Director, Joint Director, Additional Director and 昀椀nally Director Agriculture from the date persons junior to the petitioner were allowed such promotions. It may be directed that the promotion orders be issued with all consequential bene昀椀ts;” 2. As per the pleadings in the writ petition, the petitioner was appointed on 05.09.1966 as Chemist Ghee Grading in the respondent-Department under the Union Territory of Himachal Pradesh. His appointment was made against direct recruitment quota. 3. As per the Recruitment and Promotion Rules prevalent, the essential quali昀椀cation for the post of Chemist Ghee Grading was B.Sc. (Agriculture) and the petitioner was having the said quali昀椀cation. Further, the post of Agriculture Inspector was the feeder post for promotion to the post of Chemist Ghee Grading. 4. It is pleaded in the petition that one Sh. Y.P. Gupta, who was appointed as Agriculture Inspector in the year 1971 with the respondent-Department, was admittedly 3 junior to the petitioner. 5. Subsequently, the post of Chemist Ghee Grading was made feeder post to the post of Assistant Soil Chemist and the petitioner became eligible to be promoted as Class-II O昀케cer (i.e. Assistant Soil Chemist) etc. 6. Later on, vide Noti昀椀cation dated 26.02.1975 (Annexure P-2), the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Soil Chemist for a period of six months only or till such time, as the posts were 昀椀lled in regularly. In sequel to the said Noti昀椀cation, the petitioner joined his duties on 07.03.1975. 7. It has been averred that though the petitioner was fully eligible to be promoted on regular basis as Class-II O昀케cer i.e. Assistant Soil Chemist, but he was appointed only for a 昀椀xed period of six months. It has further been averred that the Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post of Chemist Ghee Grading were amended and M.Sc. Soil Sciences/Agriculture was made essential quali昀椀cation and Sh. 4 Y.P. Gupta was appointed by way of Direct recruitment as Chemist Ghee Grading in the respondent-Department. Thereafter, he was promoted on ad-hoc basis on the newly created post of Analytical Chemist, Class-II post. The Recruitment and Promotion Rules were amemded with a view to favour the said Sh. Y.P. Gupta. Thereafter on 14.10.1977, 13 more persons, who were junior to the petitioner, were promoted against Class-II posts, on regular basis and this time too, the petitioner was not considered. 8. The petitioner was reverted to the post of Chemist Ghee Grading. Feeling aggrieved by such orders, the petitioner had preferred a writ petition along with other persons which was registered as CWP No. 134 of 1977 and this Court while deciding the same had issued directions that the reversion, if any will be subject to the 昀椀nal outcome of the petition. The petitioner could not join since he sustained injurious. However, lateron, the petitioner was again 5 promoted vide Noti昀椀cation dated 19.08.1978 (Annexure P-3) to the post of Assistant Soil Chemist, a Class-II post, on ad- hoc basis. Since the petitioner never joined the post of Chemist Ghee Grading, and was already working as Assistant Soil Chemist, he submitted a representation to the respondent-Department averring therein that as he had never worked against the post of Chemist Ghee Grading after reversion, he should be treated as having worked against the post of Assistant Soil Chemist since the date of his initial ad- hoc promotion w.e.f. 26.02.1975. 9. Later on, vide Noti昀椀cation dated 07.03.1979 (Annexure P-4), the petitioner was promoted on regular basis as Assistant Soil Chemist along with said Sh. Y.P. Gupta, who was shown junior to him. 10. After reversion of the petitioner, he did not join against the reverted post of Chemist Ghee Grading and later on vide o昀케ce order dated 17.05.1979 (Annexure P-6), ex-post 6 facto sanction was accorded for the leave and it was certi昀椀ed that during the period of leave, the petitioner would have continued to function as Assistant Soil Chemist, meaning thereby the period of leave w.e.f. 19.10.1977 to 22.08.1978 was treated for all intents and purposes as a service period. 11. It has been averred that Sh. Y.P. Gupta was promoted as Sr. Analytical Chemist on 23.07.1987, which post was equivalent to the post of Deputy Director, ignoring the petitioner, who was senior to him. Though the petitioner was not eligible to the post in view of the essential quali昀椀cation of M.Sc., but he could have been promoted to other vacant posts of Deputy Director, analogous post in the same scale i.e. Principal, Pulses and Oil Seed Specialist and Vegetable Specialist etc. 12. The respondent-Department on 13.05.1988 circulated the seniority list of Class-II O昀케cers showing the seniority position of O昀케cers as on 01.03.1988 and the 7 petitioner feeling aggrieved by the seniority position, submitted a representation dated 08.07.1988 (Annexure P-7). On 08.11.1990, another tentative seniority list was circulated, but the grievance of the petitioner was not redressed. 13. In July, 1991, Sh. Y.P. Gupta was promoted to the post of Joint Director. On 24.04.1993, the pay revision was adopted by the Agriculture Department w.e.f. 01.01.1991 and by virtue of the pay revision, the posts of Agriculture Development O昀케cer upto the level of Sr. Analytical Chemist and Deputy Directors were put in one Single Cadre with various stages of pay scale i.e. entry scale, scale after 8 years and scale after 18 years. After revision of the pay scales, Recruitment and Promotion Rules applicable to various posts were automatically repealed. 14. On 24.01.1994, the petitioner was granted the pay scale of Rs.2100-3700, after completion of 8 years’ service in the grade of Class-II O昀케cer i.e. Soil Testing O昀케cer. It has 8 been averred that the petitioner had 昀椀led Original Application bearing OA No.154 of 1994, in February, 1994, claiming seniority and continuity in service w.e.f. 07.03.1975 which was disposed of by the Tribunal treating the same as representation and direction has been given to respondent No.1 to prepare the 昀椀nal seniority list of Class-II o昀케cers, if not already done. The representation submitted by the petitioner was accepted and he was assigned the seniority w.e.f. 07.03.1975. 15. On 05.05.1995, the representation submitted by the petitioner was accepted and he was allowed seniority w.e.f. 07.03.1975 with all consequential bene昀椀ts including promotion and further he was assigned seniority from the due date (Annexure P-9). As per the tentative seniority list of Class-II O昀케cers, Group IV (Assistant Soil Chemist etc.) of Agriculture Department, Himachal Pradesh, as it stood on 01.01.1987 (Page 40), the petitioner was shown at Sr. No. 3 9 and the said Sh. Y.P. Gupta at Sr. No. 11. 16. Thereafter, respondent-Department issued a Noti昀椀cation on 05.05.1995 consequent upon formation of a single cadre of the posts of A.D.O.s, District Agriculture O昀케cer, Subject Matter Specialists, Deputy Directors of Agriculture and posted the petitioner as Senior Analytical Chemist, Shimla, against vacant post. 17. It is the case of the petitioner that even after the issuance of Annexures P-9 and P-10, the grievance of the petitioner was not fully redressed for the reason that he should have been ordered to be placed over and above Sh. Y.P. Gupta. 18. It is also pleaded that in the month of June 1996, Sh. Y.P. Gupta was promoted as Additional Director, whereas the petitioner should have been promoted against the post of Additional Director or equivalent post prior to Sh. Y.P. Gupta. 19. It has further been averred that the Tribunal vide 10 order dated 11.11.1996 (Annexure P-11) passed in T.A. No. 195 of 1986, had directed the respondents to hold the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) again for consideration and regularization of the cases of the applicants along with other eligible candidates on year-wise basis and draw a panel in relation to the vacancies for the years 1974, 1975, 1976 and 1977, respectively. Thereafter, in Original Application No. 154 of 1994, wherein the petitioner had sought to count the continuous o昀케ciation period as Class-II, O昀케cer w.e.f. 07.03.1975 in the Class II (Gazetted) post of the Agriculture Department and assign him the seniority accordingly with all consequential bene昀椀ts and further consider his claim for placement to the post of Deputy Director of Agriculture on the basis of the continuous o昀케ciation as a Class II O昀케cer in the Department of Agriculture w.e.f. 07.03.1975 with all consequential bene昀椀ts, the respondents had recti昀椀ed the seniority. However, after 11 passing the judgment dated 11.11.1996 (Annexure P-11), wherein direction was given to the respondents-Department to hold DPC again for consideration and regularization of the cases of the petitioner(s) along with other eligible candidates, the respondents have not fully complied with the directions. 20. Respondent No.1 though issued a Noti昀椀cation on 07.07.2000 (Annexure P-12) and passed a detailed order after considering the earlier orders passed on the representation made by the petitioner and after receipt of the recommendation of the Review DPC in consultation with the H.P. Public Service Commission to promote the petitioner to the post of Class-II Gazetted in the pay scale of Rs. 350–900 w.e.f. 17.12.1975, held him entitled to all consequential bene昀椀ts upon his promotion to the Class II Gazetted post w.e.f. 17.12.1975, in view of the order of the then Agriculture Production Commissioner dated 05.05.1995. 21. Though as per the order dated 07.07.2000, the 12 昀椀nal seniority list of Class-II O昀케cers (Assistant Soil Chemist etc.) of Agriculture Department, H.P., as it stood on 01.01.1987, was circulated on 17.11.2000 (Annexure P-13), in which the petitioner was shown at Sr. No. 3 and the said Sh. Y.P. Gupta at Sr. No. 11, but the petitioner has not been granted the bene昀椀ts, as emanating from the said Noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000. 22. The petitioner, feeling aggrieved by the non- implementation of the Noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000, preferred a petition, being CWP(T) No.7540 of 2008, which was disposed of on 02.12.2010 (Annexure P-14), wherein a direction was given to the respondents to implement the same with all consequential bene昀椀ts within a period of two months from the date of production of a certi昀椀ed copy of the judgment by the petitioner. 23. After issuance of the directions given by this Court, the respondents did not implement the order dated 13 07.11.2010, which compelled the petitioner to 昀椀le a Contempt Petition being COPC No. 237 of 2011, titled, Jugendra Singh vs. Ram Subhag Singh and another before this Court. The said contempt petition was dismissed on 20.03.2012, in view of the intervening developments, reserving liberty to the petitioner to pursue his surviving grievances in appropriate proceedings, as well. 24. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the Noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000, the petitioner has not been granted all the bene昀椀ts though as per the 昀椀nal seniority list and Noti昀椀cation dated 05.05.1995, the person namely Y.P. Gupta was considered junior to the petitioner. The petitioner has been granted only the bene昀椀t of a sum of Rs. 13,120/-, which has been accepted by him under protest. 25. The respondents 昀椀led reply to the petition and have submitted that the petitioner was appointed as Chemist Ghee Grading in the respondent-Department on 05.09.1966. 14 Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Soil Chemist on ad-hoc basis and posted at Kalpa at Kinnaur, where he joined his duties on 07.03.1975. The orders vide which petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Soil Chemist on ad-hoc basis, were withdrawn w.e.f. 24.10.1977 and against which, the petitioner had preferred a writ petition before this Court. During the pendency of the aforesaid case, the name of the petitioner was not considered for promotion due to the matter being sub-judice. Later on, the petitioner got his name deleted from the array of parties and accordingly, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Soil Chemist vide Noti昀椀cation dated 19.08.1978. 26. After passing the orders in CWP-T No. 7540 of 2008, the directions contained in the judgment have been implemented and the petitioner has been paid the emoluments as per Annexure R-2. The seniority list of Class-II Cadre in the Department was re-drawn and the petitioner 15 was shown at Sr. No. 3. 27. During the year 1987, the post of Senior Analytical Chemist fell vacant and a panel of eligible Class-II o昀케cers was drawn and the DPC for the post was held on 07.05.1987. As per the recommendation of the DPC, the name of Sh. Y.P. Gupta was recommended for promotion to the post of Senior Analytical Chemist. 28. It has been stated that the petitioner has been granted seniority w.e.f. the date of his ad-hoc promotion i.e. 07.03.1975 with all consequential bene昀椀ts including promotion to the next higher post on the date such promotions were given to the juniors. 29. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 30. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as Chemist Ghee Grading on 05.09.1966 and promoted to the post of Assistant Soil Chemist on ad-hoc 16 basis on 07.03.1975 and one Sh. Y.P. Gupta was appointed as Agriculture Inspector 27.02.1979. The post of Chemist Ghee Grading was feeding category for promotion to the post of Assistant Soil Chemist and the petitioner was promoted as Assistant Soil Chemist vide Noti昀椀cation dated 26.02.1975, but on purely temporary basis. The Recruitment and Promotion Rules for the post of Chemist Ghee Grading were amended and M.Sc. Soil Science/Agriculture was made essential quali昀椀cation for the said post and Sh. Y.P. Gupta was appointed as Chemist Ghee Grading on direct recruitment basis. 31. It is not in dispute that as per Noti昀椀cation dated 07.03.1979 (Annexure P-4), the petitioner was promoted as Assistant Soil Chemist, which was a Class-II (Gazetted) on regular basis along with Sh. Y.P. Gupta, depicting the petitioner at Sr. No.2 and Mr. Y.P. Gupta at Sr. No.3. 32. It is clear from a perusal of Noti昀椀cation dated 17 05.05.1995 (Annexure P-5), that upon formation of single cadre of the posts of a A.D.O.’s District Agriculture O昀케cer, Subject Matter Specialists and Deputy Director of Agriculture vide Noti昀椀cation dated 24th April, 1993, the petitioner who was working as District Agriculture O昀케cer, posted as Senior Analytical Chemist Shimla. Further, after the directions issued in the Original Application preferred by the petitioner, the respondents had issued a Noti昀椀cation on 07.07.2000 after the recommendations of the review DPC and in consultation with the H.P. Public Service Commission to promote him along with other o昀케cials of various groups of feeder category to the posts of Class -II Gazetted in the pay scale of Rs.350-900 w.e.f. 17.12.1975. Further, it was speci昀椀cally observed that the petitioner is allowed all the consequential bene昀椀ts upon his promotion to Class II Gazetted post w.e.f. 17.12.1975, in view of the order of the then APC dated 05.05.1995. Once the petitioner has been held entitled to all bene昀椀ts w.e.f. 18 17.12.1995, he is entitled to all bene昀椀ts including promotion. 33. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the respondents have though issued the Noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000, but the petitioner has not been promoted to the post of Deputy Director and equivalent posts, which were available in the year 1987 and the vacancies were to be 昀椀lled up 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion. However, all the 5 vacancies were 昀椀lled up by way of direct recruitment. Since the respondents had issued the Noti昀椀cation on 07.07.2000, the natural corollary of that was to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Director, especially when it was ordered that the category of the petitioner shall be considered as a feeder category to the post of Class-II (Gazetted) in the pay scale of Rs.350-900 w.e.f. 17.12.1975. 34. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents-State has vehemently opposed the prayer made 19 by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the matter remained sub judice for a considerable period and due to that reason, his matter could not be considered. It has been contended that Sh. Y.P. Gupta was having the quali昀椀cation of M.Sc. (Soil Science/Agriculture) and the petitioner was not possessing the requisite quali昀椀cation. Further, learned counsel argued that since the petitioner was not having the requisite quali昀椀cation for promotion, he could not be considered and the respondents had implemented the directions. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Deputy Director of agriculture w.e.f. 27.12.1991. 35. No doubt, the petitioner has been promoted to the post of Deputy Director, but if the tentative seniority list of Class-II O昀케cers dated 20.12.2000, issued by the respondents themselves, is perused, he has been shown at Sr. No.22 (Page 110) and Sh. Y.P. Gupta at Sr. No.47 and this is after Noti昀椀cation, in which, the petitioner has been directed to be 20 promoted to the posts of Class-II w.e.f. 17.12.1975. Not only this, respondent No.2, who has sworn an a昀케davit in support of the reply, who was at Sr. No.60 in this tentative seniority list. Not only this, even as per the documents of the respondents in the reply, they had taken a stand that the matter regarding the promotion of the petitioner as Deputy Director of Agriculture was taken up with the Government w.e.f. 27.12.1991 and even this has not been followed by the respondents. It has been vehemently argued that if there was no post, a similar post of Deputy Director was required to be created in the year 1987 when Sh. Y.P. Gupta got the promotion as Senior Analytical Chemist and the petitioner was required to be promoted as Additional Director and Director or he was required to be placed in the scale of Director as was done in the case of Sh. Y.P. Gupta in the year 1991. 36. Once a single cadre for the posts of ADOs, District 21 Agriculture O昀케cer, Subject Matter Specialist and Deputy Director of Agriculture was made, the petitioner was required to be promoted as Deputy Director or equivalent post w.e.f. 1987, more particularly when as per Noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000 (Annexure P-12), respondent No.1 had ordered the promotion of the petitioner along with other o昀케cials of feeder categories to the post of Class II Gazetted in the pay scale of Rs.350-900 w.e.f. 17.12.1975. 37. The entire case hinges upon the Noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000, issued by respondent No.1. The respondents have contended that the petitioner was not eligible to hold the post of Senior Analytical Chemist for the reason that he was not ful昀椀lling the required educational quali昀椀cation for the post, which was M.Sc. (Soil Science/Agriculture), whereas, he was possessing B.Sc. (Agriculture) Degree, therefore his claim could not be considered for promotion. However, the said contention is negated for the reason that as per Noti昀椀cation 22 dated 05.05.1995, a single cadre of posts of ADOs/District Agriculture O昀케cer, Subject Matter Specialist and Deputy Director of Agriculture, was made and thereafter, after the directions given by the Tribunal, the respondents had issued the Noti昀椀cation on 07.07.2000, whereby after the recommendation of the Review DPC, the order of promotion of the petitioner along with other o昀케cials of various groups of feeder categories to the post of Class-II Gazetted was made w.e.f. 17.12.1975, the petitioner was entitled to all consequential bene昀椀ts w.e.f. 17.12.1975. 38. 38. The petitioner had sought the implementation of the said order by 昀椀ling the writ petition, which was disposed of on 02.12.2010, with a direction to the respondents to implement the Noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000 within a period of two months and after that the respondents had partly implemented the Noti昀椀cation and had conveyed the approval for 昀椀xing pay in favour of the petitioner, but the bene昀椀t of his 23 promotion was not granted, which compelled him to 昀椀le the contempt petition, which was disposed of on 20.03.2012, with the liberty reserved to the petitioner to pursue his surviving grievances. 39. The petitioner had been 昀椀ghting for his rights from the very beginning when Sh. Y.P. Gupta was promoted by amending the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, making the petitioner ineligible. However, when the respondents had issued the Noti昀椀cation on 07.07.2000, thereby making it clear that the petitioner be promoted along with other o昀케cials of various groups of feeder category to the various group of Class II Gazetted posts in the pay scale of Rs.350-900 w.e.f. 17.12.1975 and further it was observed that all the consequential bene昀椀ts to the petitioner upon his promotion to Class II Gazetted post w.e.f. 17.12.1975 be made as per the Noti昀椀cation dated 05.05.1995 (Annexure P-10) by the then Agriculture Production Commissioner, the respondents 24 cannot now take a u-turn by saying that the petitioner was ineligible to be promoted. 40. The Learned counsel for the respondents in the reply had also admitted that the post of Deputy Director of Agriculture is required to be created to give promotion/placement to the petitioner and since the respondents have admitted the said fact, therefore, to impart justice and remove anomaly, the petitioner is required to be promoted at least from the date when Sh. Y.P. Gupta was promoted. 41. It is not the case of the respondents that Sh. Y.P. Gupta was senior to the petitioner in the feeder category and further even in the seniority list, he was shown junior to the petitioner. Once the respondents have issued the Noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000 to grant all the consequential bene昀椀ts, they cannot now take a u-turn to say that the petitioner was not eligible and in case the posts were not in existence, to impart 25 justice, the respondents have to create a supernumerary post, so that the persons, who have worked on the post are not disturbed. 42. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had the occasion to interpret the meaning of consequential bene昀椀ts in K. Samba Moorthy versus Sanjiv Chadha and others, 2025 INSC 110 and held that the bene昀椀t of promotion is covered by the expression “consequential”. The relevant paras are reproduced as hereunder: “16. Learned counsel Ms. Praveena Gautam further contends that in the operative order of the learned Single Judge only consequential bene昀椀ts were given and not promotions or notional promotion up to Scale-V were ordered. According to the learned counsel, the only consequential bene昀椀ts to which the appellant became entitled, on the setting aside of the minor penalty imposed on him, was the payment of the arrears in salary occasioned by the said penalty and nothing more. According to the learned counsel, consequential bene昀椀ts would not include promotion with e昀昀ect from 28.07.2001 as the same stood cancelled as early as on 30.08.2002 and was not challenged. 17. to 29. xxxxx 30. Insofar as promotion with e昀昀ect from 28.07.2001 for the post of Manager Grade-III is concerned, we order that the appellant should be granted 26 the same with all monetary bene昀椀ts since the fundamental defect in the enquiry was due to no fault of the appellant. The defect was also accepted by the Bank when they did not press the appeal. The bene昀椀t of promotion to Manager Grade-III from 28.07.2001 is covered in the expression “consequential bene昀椀ts” as ordered in the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 20.07.2017 in Writ Petition No. 7616 of 2008. We say so on the facts of the present case.” 43. Once the respondents have promoted the petitioner to the post of Deputy Director of Agriculture w.e.f. 27.12.1991, the plea raised by the learned Counsel for the State that the petitioner was not eligible on the post when Sh. Y.P. Gupta was promoted, cannot be countenanced and the same is rejected. 44. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to grant the bene昀椀t to the petitioner as per Noti昀椀cation dated 07.07.2000 and consequential promotions to the post of Deputy Director, Joint Director, Additional Director and Director (Agriculture) from the date, when persons junior to him were promoted. Arrears on account of the implementation of the order dated 27 07.07.2000 shall also be paid to the petitioner from the date of institution of the petition till its payment. 45. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 24 th March, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (ankit) Judge