ROADWAYS KARAMCHARI SAYUKTA PARISHAD Vs. UTTARAKHAND PARIVAHAN NIGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed by the Union of Roadways Employees called "Roadways Karamchari Sayukta Parishad". The grievance of the petitioner is that the Uttarakhand Transport Corporation, who had conducted inter departmental selection for promotion of Conductors to the next higher post of Office Assistant Grade -II, has not been done in accordance with the Regulations i.e. The Uttar Pradesh Road Transport Corporation Employees (Other Than Officers) Service, Regulations, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as "Regulations"). Hence the same is in violation of law and as such promotion process is liable to be quashed and the private respondent Nos. 3 to 8, who have been so promoted, be set aside.

(2.) IT is an admitted fact that promotion to the post of Office Assistant Grade -II is done on the feeding cadre of Conductors whereas the petitioner/Union insists that the only criteria for promotion is "seniority subject to the rejection of unfit". The respondents on the other hand have conducted a test and only such persons have been promoted who could qualify the test. The petitioner alleges that it is in violation of the Regulations and hence bad in law. The relevant provisions of the aforesaid Regulations are

(3.) FROM a joint reading that all the above three provisions it is clear that though the promotional criteria has to be seniority subject to the rejection of unfit, but the Corporation is at liberty to hold a test in order to see the suitability of a person to the post, for this reason a test was conducted. It is again true that the joint reading of the aforesaid provisions would mean that if a person, who is senior in the seniority list, qualifies the test then the seniority will come into play and he will have the first right to be promoted, irrespective of his position in the qualifying test, but test he must first qualify. The petitioner before this Court claimed to be senior to the private respondents, who have been ultimately selected and promoted. They raised objection that the test is in violation of the law promotion must be made purely on the basis of seniority and hence boycotted the selection and approached this Court.