Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 534 (UTT)

Narayan Singh Darmwal v. State of Uttarakhand

2016-08-31

SUDHANSHU DHULIA

body2016
JUDGMENT : Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. The petitioners in both these petitions are either Instructors in Stenography or Secretarial Practice, in the department of Employment (Training and Employment), Government of Uttarakhand. The petitioners in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1800 of 2015 seek promotion to the post of Assistant Employment Officer, whereas in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 543 of 2015 has been filed by the petitioners challenging the Rules which are known as the Uttar Pradesh Assistant Employment Officer Service Rules, 1994. 2. Admittedly, the promotion to the post of Assistant Employment Officer is made on the basis of seniority subject to the rejection of unfit as per the Uttar Pradesh Assistant Employment Officer Service Rules, 1994. It is again an admitted position that the Rules are of the erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh which are also applicable in the State of Uttarakhand in view of Section 88 of the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000. On this there is no dispute. 3. According to the petitioners in WPSS No. 1800 of 2015, being the senior most in their feeding cadre of Instructors, they have a legitimate claim to be promoted to the post of Assistant Employment Officer. 4. Learned State Counsel submits today that they have already sent the requisition on 01.10.2014 for these promotions. The reason, why the promotions are not being made so far is that the State Government is contemplating to frame new Rules, which has not been done as yet. 5. All the same, there seems to be no reason for denying the promotion to the petitioners in WPSS No. 1800 of 2015 under the existing Rules considering that their promotion is long due. Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1800 of 2015 is therefore allowed. It is hereby directed that the promotional exercise be undertaken in accordance with existing Rules, where claim of the petitioners shall be considered for promotion in accordance with law and necessary orders be passed as expeditiously as possible but definitely within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 6. So far as Writ Petition (S/S) No. 543 of 2015 is concerned, the petitioners have challenged the Rules of 1994 and since statement has been given by learned State Counsel that the State Government is contemplating to frame new Rules, presently no interference is called for. 6. So far as Writ Petition (S/S) No. 543 of 2015 is concerned, the petitioners have challenged the Rules of 1994 and since statement has been given by learned State Counsel that the State Government is contemplating to frame new Rules, presently no interference is called for. The State Government may frame new Rules, however, this shall not delay the promotional exercise which this Court had already directed in WPSS No. 1800 of 2015. 7. Writ petition (S/S) No. 543 of 2015 stands disposed.