KESHAV DATT TIWARI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. C.D. Bahuguna, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Anup Kr. Verma, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Avtar Singh Rawat, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. H.M. Raturi, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for private respondent Nos. 3 to 49.

(2.) THE petitioners before this Court are Firemen working in the Fire Service Department of the State. The next promotion from the post of Fireman is to the post of Leading Fireman. The service conditions of Fireman even in the erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh was governed by the U.P. Fire Service Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1944). It is admitted case that under Section 87 of the U.P. Reorganization Act 2000, the aforesaid provisions of law is also applicable to the State of Uttarakhand. Under Section 25 of the Act of 1944, the State Government has rule making powers, which read as under: - -

(3.) THE argument of the learned senior counsel for the petitioners is that all such rules have been framed under Section 241(2)(b) of the Government of India Act 1935, but the Government has rule making powers under Section 25 of the Act of 1944 and therefore these rules should be read as framed under the provisions of the Act. This Court is not inclined to accept this argument for the reason that inspite of the powers of the Government to frame rules under Section 25 of the Act of 1944, the fact of the matter is that ultimately the service rules have been framed under Section 241(2)(b) of the Government of India Act 1935, which is a "similar" provision to what we have now under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, and reads as under: - -