ROHIT KUMAR MAHOBEY Vs. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 03.10.2006 (Annexure P-4) passed by Respondent No. 1 whereby considering the representation made by Respondent No. 3 (Sanjeev Kumar Shrivastava) the order dated 10.12.2001 (Annexure P-2) promoting the Petitioner from the post of Clerk -Steno to that of Stenographer has been cancelled and Respondent No. 3 has been promoted to the post of Stenographer from that of Clerk-Steno.

(2.) Case of the Petitioner is that vide order dated 7.1.1995 (Annexure P-1) he was appointed as Clerk-Steno on the pay scale of 950-25-1000-30-1210-40-1530 plus special pay of Rs. 75 per month and in pursuance of the same he joined on the said post on 10.1.1995. Further case of the Petitioner is that though Respondent No. 3 was also appointed on the same post along with the Petitioner, he had joined his duties on 11.1.1995 i.e. a day after joining of the Petitioner and that being so, the Petitioner is senior to Respondent No. 3 for all practical purposes. According to the case of the Petitioner, one vacancy of Stenographer arose in the office of Respondent No. 2 (District and Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon) in the year 2001 and vide order dated 10.12.2001 (Annexure P-2) the Petitioner was promoted to the said post and assumed the charge thereof on that very day. However, all of a sudden, vide order dated 03.10.2006 (Annexure P-4) passed by Respondent No. 1 his promotion on the post of Stenographer has been cancelled and Respondent No. 3 herein stepped in his shoes.

(3.) Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record.