Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19027 of 2019 Petitioner :- Anarpati Verma And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kailash Singh Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Shri K.S. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
Petitioners are before this Court with the prayer to command the respondents to consider the claim of petitioners for promotion on vacant post of Additional Director of Education from retrospective date when the juniors to the petitioners were promoted, with all consequential benefits without any further delay. Further prayer has been made to command the respondents to consider the petitioners for promotion on the next higher vacant post of Director of Education after promotion on the post of Additional Director of Education in conformity with placement in seniority fixed by order dated 09.01.2019 and to provide the petitioner no.1 the charge of officiating Director of Education as per placement in the seniority list until her substantive promotion on the post of Director of Education is not made. It has also been prayed to command the respondents to make compliance of the mandate issued by this Court vide order dated 05.07.2013 passed in Writ Petition no.33419 of 2013 and to direct the respondents to decide the petitioners representation dated 28.01.2019 and 19.08.2019.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even if petitioners are senior they have been deprived of promotion, whereas, their juniors have been promoted. At the same time, it is submitted that petitioners are not questioning the promotion of their junior but they seek promotion in view of provisions provided under U.P. Educational (General Education Cadre) Rules, 1992, especially Rule 17(2), which deals with criteria for promotion on the post of Director of Education on the basis of seniority subject to rejection of unfit through a selection committee.
In this regard, Shri Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgement and order dated 05.07.2013 passed by Division Bench of this Court in Writ C no.33419/2013 (Jitendra Kumar Goel vs. State of U.P. and others). For ready reference, the relevant extract of said order is reproduced hereinunder:-
"46. In these facts and circumstances, we allow this petition and direct respondents 1 and 2 as under:
i. No officer shall be given charge of more than one post at the same station unless officers in the same cadre are not available or for some temporary period are not available at the same station. However, this arrangement shall be temporary and would cease as soon as non availability goes.
ii. If there is deficiency of officers in the cadre, State Government, if find necessary to give charge of more than one office to one or more officers, it shall follow existing seniority, whatever it is, for the said purpose and officer(s) working on lower cadre/posts shall not be given charge of higher cadre(s) post, if an officer in equivalent post or cadre is available.
iii. Respondent no.1 shall forthwith review all such matters and pass appropriate orders consistent with the above directions within one month from the date of communication of this order to him and submit compliance report to this Court within next a fortnight. iv.The petitioner is also entitled to cost which we quantify to Rs.5,000/- against respondents 1 and 2.
47. A copy of this order shall be furnished to respondents no.1 and 2 forthwith and Registrar General shall take appropriate steps therefor."
The said view had been reiterated by the order passed by Division Bench of this Court dated 12.03.2014 in Writ A no.61087/2013 (Arun Kumar Dubey vs. State of U.P. and others).
On the other hand, Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that grievance of the petitioners can very well be looked into and remedied by the second respondent.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits of the case, on consent, the writ petition is disposed of asking the Principal Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of U.P. Lucknow to look into the grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate order but definitely after providing opportunity of hearing to all the stake holders, keeping in mind the orders passed in Jitendra Kumar Goel (supra) as well as Arun Kumar Dubey (supra). The said exercise is to be completed within the period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that in case, the claim the petitioners found to be fit for promotion, the process of promotion may commence by constituting an appropriate selection committee.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 A. Pandey