Court No. - 39
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13254 of 2019 Petitioner :- Bhrigunath Thakur Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kushmondeya Shahi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Nisheeth Yadav
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 3 and Sri Nisheeth Yadav, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 4.
Considering the nature of order proposed to be passed, there is no need to issue notice to respondent no. 5 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he was appointed as Assistant Teacher in basic schools run by Basic Shiksha Parishad vide order dated 31.12.2005 under the provision contained in U.P. Basic Education Teachers Service Rule, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as "Rule 1981") and presently, he is working as Assistant Teacher in Prathmic Vidyalay Dayaram, Arazi Lines, Varanasi. Rule 18 of Rules 1981 provides the procedure for promotion and seniority is the criteria for promotion subject to rejection of unfit. Seniority list was prepared by respondent no. 4 vide order dated 12.07.2019 for promotion on the post of Head Master, Junior Basic School/ Assistant Teacher Senior Basic School having the name of 310 persons. Out of which from serial nos. 1 to 214, names have been mentioned on the basis of date of appointment whereas names of teachers mentioned at serial nos. 215 to 210 have been mentioned on the basis of quality point marks. He further submits that Rule 18 of Rules 1981 nowhere provides seniority on the basis of quality point marks. Against the said seniority list, petitioner has submitted objection vide representation dated 31.07.2019 before respondent no. 2, but till date, no decision has been taken. Lastly, he submits that a suitable direction may be issued to respondent no. 2 to consider the objection of the petitioner and decide the same strictly in accordance with Rule 18 of Rules 1981.
Sri Nisheeth Yadav, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 4 submits that representation of the petitioner shall be considered and decided in accordance with law at the earliest.
Under such facts and circumstances, this petition is disposed of with direction to respondent no. 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 31.07.2019 and decide the same strictly in accordance with law maximum within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order. Petitioner is directed to annex the photocopy of representation dated 31.07.2019 along with certified copy of the order.
It is made clear that Court has not adjudicated the case on merits and is upon the respondent no. 2 to decide the application of the petitioner after considering the relevant Rule as well as Government Orders occupying the field.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 Arvind