Court No. - 32
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 878 of 2019 Appellant :- Krishna Chandra Pandey Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Dinesh Kumar Yadav,Krishna Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Adarsh Bhushan
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Order on Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No.1 of 2019.
There is a delay of 95 days in filling the appeal. This application has been filed to condone the delay.
Cause Shown for the delay has been satisfactorily explained.
There is no objection from the side of the respondents.
Delay condonation application is allowed and the delay is condoned.
Order on Appeal This special appeal has been filed against the order dated 22.5.2019 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ A No.31216 of 2008 which was dismissed.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant- petitioner, Shri Adarsh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
From the perusal of the record it shows that the appellant-petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer (Trainee) vide office memorandum dated 26.12.2001. After successful completion of training of one year appellant-petitioner was regularized in the officer memorandum dated 16.02.2004, w.e.f. 01.03.2003. Thereafter, the appellant-petitioner was confirmed on 01.04.2006.
Learned Single Judge in the impugned order observed that the specific stand taken by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 with regard to the date of appointment, regularization and confirmation of the petitioner to the post of Junior Engineer is not disputed in the rejoinder affidavit. There is no reply to the averments in paragraph No.13 of the counter affidavit.
Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 has stated that the promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer is governed by the U.P. State Electricity Board Services of Engineers Regulations, 1970. Regulation 5 provides the source of recruitment to the post of Assistant Engineer as (a) 75% direct recruitment; (b) 25% by promotion from the members of Junior Engineer service in the Selection Grade in the manner prescribed in Appendix- 'C'. Appendix 'C' to the regulation provides for the selection based on merit with due regard to seniority as criteria for promotion, from among all the members of the Junior Engineer service confirmed in the Selection Grade, who have put in atleast 4 years of service, whether officiating or permanent in that grade and who have passed such qualifying examination as may be provided. The degree in electrical / mechanical / telecommunication / instrumentation engineering or a degree or diploma recognized as equivalent is the essential qualification. Clause-4 in Appendix 'C' provides that the recommendation for promotion is to be made by a duly constituted screening committee.
It was further submitted that the promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer could only be made after scrutiny by the screening committee.
From the further perusal of the record it is apparent that the appellant-petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Junior Engineer (Trainee) by the office memorandum dated 26.02.2001 subject to the condition that the petitioner had to complete one year training. After completion of one year training, the petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer (Ordinary Grade) vide office memorandum dated 16.02.2004, with effect from 1.3.2003. Petitioner was later on confirmed w.e.f. 1.4.2006.
As per the requirement of Regulation 4, minimum four years of service as a confirmed Junior Engineer in selection grade is the necessary criteria for promotion. That the appellant-petitioner did not complete the requisite period as confirmed Junior Engineer in Selection Grade as such there was no question of his promotion w.e.f. 01.07.2003 i.e. the date of obtaining degree in engineering.
Thus the appellant-petitioner did not render four years of requisite service to the post of Junior Engineer by 01.07.2003, promotion could not be accorded to him with effect from 1.7.2003.
n view of the above, we do not see any illegality and infirmity in the order dated 22.5.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge.
This special appeal lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019
A. Dewal