LAWS(UTN)-2022-9-75

BHARAT SINGH BOHARA Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE CHAMPAWAT

Decided On September 01, 2022
Bharat Singh Bohara Appellant
V/S
DISTRICT JUDGE CHAMPAWAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) After hearing the learned counsels on the last date, we posted three queries, to which we desired answer from the respondent-District Judgeship Champawat.

(2.) Learned counsel for respondent no. 1-District Judgeship Champawat has taken instructions, and informs that the number of vacancies which were available on the date when the appellant was promoted as Junior Clerk/Assistant in the promotional cadre were three, out of which two were to be filled up from Group 'D' employees, and one post from the 'driver' cadre. The appellant as well as the respondent-writ petitioner were Group 'D' employees, who had participated in the promotional process wherein the appellant was promoted, and the respondent-writ petitioner was not.

(3.) The learned Single Judge has found in favour of the respondent-writ petition that she was wrongly denied one mark in respect of Question No. 6, i.e. "In which year Judgeship of District Champawat was established?" Four options were given, i.e. (a) 1999; (b) 2000; (c) 2001; (d) 2002. According to the respondent-writ petitioner, none of these options were correct. The learned Single Judge found that the Judgeship of Champawat was established vide Government Order dtd. 1/9/1998 of the Uttar Pradesh Government. Thus, the respondent-writ petitioner was correct in claiming that none of the options was correct.