Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 504 (UTT)

Iqbal Ahmed. v. State Of Uttarakhand

2021-10-26

MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI

body2021
JUDGMENT Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. - District Magistrate, Nainital issued a notification on 30.05.2002, inviting applications for appointment on the post of Patwari (Hill) & Patwari (Plains). The said notification is on record as Annexure-1 to the Writ Petition. Perusal of the notification reveals that there were 13 vacancies available on the post of Patwari (Hill) and 11 vacancies on the post of Patwari (Plains), thus, selection process was initiated for supplying 24 vacancies. 2. In clause 4 of the said notification, it was clearly mentioned that candidates will have to indicate the post for which the application is being made. Thus, it was open for a candidate to apply for the post of Patwari (Hill) or Patwari (Plain) or for both the posts. 3. It is not in dispute that petitioner had mentioned in his application that he is applying for both the posts. The grievance raised by the petitioner now is that he should have been appointed as Patwari (Plains) and he was wrongly appointed as Patwari (Hill). 4. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner belongs to O.B.C. category and since there were two vacancies on the post of Patwari (Plains) and petitioner was second in order of merit amongst O.B.C. category candidates, therefore, he should have been appointed as Patwari (Plains). It is further his contention that, despite availability of two vacancies on the post of Patwari (Plains), not a single person belonging to O.B.C. category was appointed. 5. The reliefs sought in the Writ Petition are as follows:- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari by quashing the Letter No. 827/Seven-Assistant Land Record Officer/2020, dated 19.10.2020 (Annexure No. 12). II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus by commanding the respondent no. 3 to issue a fresh promotion list considering the mandatory provisions of Uttarakhand Annual Transfer of Public Servants Act, 2017. III. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus by commanding the respondent no. 3 to promote the petitioner on the post of Registrar Kanungo at plain areas of District Nainital, considering the services rendered by the petitioner at hill areas of District Nainital and provisions of Section 19 of the Uttarakhand Annual Transfer of Public Servants Act, 2017. IV. 3 to promote the petitioner on the post of Registrar Kanungo at plain areas of District Nainital, considering the services rendered by the petitioner at hill areas of District Nainital and provisions of Section 19 of the Uttarakhand Annual Transfer of Public Servants Act, 2017. IV. Issue any suitable writ, order or direction, which in the interest of justice and under the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. V. As an interim relief the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the operation and effect of the impugned order/ Letter No. 827/Seven-Assistant Land Record Officer/ 2020, dated 19.10.2020 (Annexure No. 12), during the pendency of the writ petition, otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." 6. Learned Standing Counsel has apprised the Court that petitioner has been promoted as Registrar Kanungo vide order dated 19.10.2020, which has been challenged by the petitioner in prayer no. 1. 7. The sole ground, on which petitioner has challenged his own promotion, is that petitioner ought to have been promoted against the post of Registrar Kanungo (Plains). Perusal of the promotion order, which is on record as Annexure-12 to the Writ Petition, however, does not support the contention made by learned counsel for the petitioner, as it is nowhere mentioned that his promotion was made against the post of Registrar Kanungo (Hill). 8. As discussed above, petitioner had not indicated his choice for the post of Patwari (Plains) in his application; instead, he had opted for the post of Patwari (Hill) as well as Patwari (Plains), therefore, appointment of the petitioner on the post of Patwari (Hill) cannot be faulted. Moreover, this Writ Petition has been filed in the year 2020; while, petitioner was appointed in the year 2003, therefore, there is unexplained delay/laches of 17 years in filing this Writ Petition. 9. When a pointed query was made to learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the post of Registrar Kanungo is also divided into two cadres, namely, Hill & Plains, he could not produce any material to show that such categorization exists on the post of Registrar Kanungo. After promotion to the post of Registrar, Kanungo, which is a unified district level cadre, the grievance of the petitioner does not survive. 10. In relief clause no. After promotion to the post of Registrar, Kanungo, which is a unified district level cadre, the grievance of the petitioner does not survive. 10. In relief clause no. 3, petitioner has sought enforcement of Section 19 of Uttarakhand Annual Transfer of Public Servants Act, 2017. Provision of the said Act are attracted only in case of transfer/posting and it cannot be pressed into service for change of cadre from plains to hill or vice-versa. 11. In such view of the matter, the reliefs, as claimed in the Writ Petition, cannot be granted. 12. Accordingly, Writ Petition fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs.