KHUSHAL SINGH RANA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri T.P.S. Takuli, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Pradeep Joshi, learned Standing Counsel for the State Government.

(2.) The validity of Rule 5 (2) of the Uttarakhand Subordinate Audit Service Rules, 2019, which provides for the manner in which the post of the Senior Auditor should be filled-up, is under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioners seek a direction to declare Rule 5(2) as ultra vires Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and as violative of Section 74(1) of the U.P. Re-organisation Act, 2000. They also seek a direction to declare that Rule 5(3) of the Uttarakhand Subordinate Audit Service Rules, 2019 (for short the '2019 Rules'), by which the post of Assistant Audit Officer has to be filled-up by promotion through departmental promotion committee from amongst those substantively appointed Senior Auditors, who have completed five years of service on the first day of that recruitment year on the basis of seniority after rejecting the unfit, as illegal.

(3.) Facts, to the limited extent necessary, are that the petitioners were appointed as Class-IV employees / Junior Clerks in the Uttar Pradesh Co- operative and Panchayat Audit Department. While the first petitioner was appointed as a Class-IV employee on 31.01.1992, he was promoted as a Junior Clerk on 21.05.2008 and as a Senior Clerk on 10.05.2013. Petitioners 2 to 5 were all appointed as Junior Clerks long after the State of Uttarakhand was created on 09.11.2000. Before the 2019 Rules were made, the relevant rules governing the field were the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Co-operative and Panchayat Audit Examination Rules, 1980 (for short the '1980 Rules'), which were subsequently amended in the year 1993.