STATE OF U P Vs. JALAL UDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The State of Uttar Pradesh calls in question legality of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court. The writ petition was filed by the present respondent No. 1 with the prayer that he should be promoted as Principal of the Government Degree College. Grievance was made that though his juniors have been promoted but he had not been promoted. Relying on earlier judgment of the High Court in N. K. Agarwal vs. Kashi Gramin Bank, Varanasi (2003 (2) UPLBEC 1333, the writ petition was allowed. Direction was given that present respondent No. 1 should be promoted as Principal of a Government Degree College with effect from the earliest date on which his juniors were promoted, his seniority was to be fixed with effect from that date and he shall be given arrears within two months. According to the High Court, the criteria for promotion have to be so as given in R. 16 of the U.P. Higher Education (Group A) Service Rules, 1985. According to the said Rules, seniority subject to rejection of unfit was the criteria in terms of R. 16(1)(b).

(3.) In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant-State submitted that the High Court completely ignored the relevant rules and based its judgment on a rule which was no longer operative. The 1985 Rules had become inoperative in view of the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant Criteria for Recruitment by Promotion Rules, 1994 (in short the 1994 Rules) as modified/amended from time to time. The said Rules have been framed in exercise of powers conferred by proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short the Constitution). In R. 2 it was clearly stipulated that the rules had overriding effect over any other rules made by the Government under the proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution or otherwise. It is clearly stipulated that the rules shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other rules as noted above. The High Court proceeded to decide the case on the basis of 1985 Rules which was not permissible to be done.