MOHD QAIUEM Vs. NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD ROORKEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Parikshit Saini, Advocate for the petitioner, Sri Manish Arora, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2 as well as Sri Manoj Tiwari, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Alok Mehra, Advocate for respondent no. 3.

(2.) THE petitioner is a Lower Division Clerk in Nagar Palika, Roorkee Haridwar. He has challenged the appointment/promotion of respondent no.3 to the post of Upper Division Clerk in Nagar Palika, Roorkee, Haridwar. THE contention of the petitioner is that the post of Upper Division Clerk can only be filled by feeding cadre of Lower Division Clerk of which he is a member and respondent no.3 is not. Admittedly respondent no.3 is a "vaccinator", which is a different cadre.

(3.) THE petitioner has filed rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit whereby he has filed certain document pertaining to the information he had sought under the Right to Information Act from the Information Officer of Nagar Palika as to what are the rules for promotion to the post of Upper Division Clerk from the post of Lower Division Clerk. He has been informed that although there is no rule regarding promotions to the post of Upper Division Clerk, the posts of Upper Division Clerk are always filled in order of seniority from Lower Division Clerk. It was also asked by him (under the R.T.I. Act) as to what procedure has been adopted before making promotion of respondent no.3 to the post of Upper Division Clerk. In reply, it has been stated that no procedure has been adopted and only the chairman has passed the order, for absorbing respondent no. 3.