Court No. - 43
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 30098 of 2015 Petitioner :- Suresh Prasad Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Amar Nath Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State authorities.
Petitioner is aggrieved by determination of his seniority on the post of Chief Cashier. A tentative seniority list of Chief Cashiers posted in different treasuries throughout the State was published on 20.10.2014 wherein name of the petitioner was shown at serial no.49. Petitioner's substantive appointment on the post of Chief Cashier is shown as on 12.11.2012. An objection has been raised by the petitioner against this tentative seniority on the ground that petitioner was allowed to officiate as Chief Cashier since 2007 and he has also been paid salary as such. Objection of the petitioner therefore is that his seniority ought to be determined from the date salary has been paid to him for the post in question i.e. in the year 2007. This objection, however, has been rejected by the authority concerned and a final seniority list has been published which records that seniority has to be reckoned from the date of substantive appointment.
A counter affidavit has been filed stating that merely because petitioner has been permitted to officiate on the post of Chief Cashier would not enure the benefit of seniority to him from such date in view of the fact that the applicable service rules provide for determination of seniority on the basis of substantive appointment on the post in question. It is stated that the order of substantive promotion in favour of petitioner has been passed only on 12.11.2012 and benefit of seniority on such post has been given to petitioner since then.
Determination of seniority to the post of Chief Cashier has to be made in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Government Servant Seniority Rules, 1991. The determination of seniority on a particular post is required to be made with reference to the date of substantive appointment offered to employee concerned. It is admitted that petitioner has been granted promotion on substantive basis vide order dated 12.11.2012 only. There is no provision shown in the applicable rules or the Government Order which permits grant of seniority from the date of officiating appointment also. The decision of the authority, therefore, to determine the final seniority is not found to be suffering from any error in law. Since the determination of seniority has been made in accordance with the applicable rules, petitioner's grievance in that regard lacks merit and is rejected.
Writ petition, accordingly, fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 Ashok Kr.