LAWS(UTN)-2019-8-48

ARJUN SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Decided On August 27, 2019
ARJUN SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application, seeking condonation of delay of 430 days in preferring this appeal, is not opposed by Mr. K. P. Upadhaya, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 4 and 5, and the delay is, therefore, condoned. Delay Condonation Application No. 10978 of 2019 stands disposed of.

(2.) This appeal is preferred against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in WPSS No. 1248 of 2015 dated 03.05.2018. The appellant herein filed WPSS No. 1248 of 2015 seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to promote the petitioner on to the post of Company Commander, (wrongly stated as Platoon Commander in the prayer), from the date of promotion i.e. 28.01.2015, when juniors to the petitioners and other incumbents had been promoted; and they may further be directed to give the salary of the promotion post, to the petitioner, from the date of promotion.

(3.) The petitioner has not even challenged the validity of the promotion, of respondent nos. 4 and 5, as Company Commander. He only seeks to be treated at par with his juniors, and to be promoted from 28.01.2015. In the order under appeal, the learned Single Judge has held that, while the petitioner had secured overall 59 marks, respondent nos. 4 and 5 had secured 66 and 70 marks respectively; the case of the petitioner was that he had been given only 04 marks in the interview; the scope of judicial review of this matter was very limited; the Court cannot substitute its wisdom for the wisdom of the Selection Committee, more particularly when no mala fides have been alleged against members of the Departmental Promotion Committee; the contention that 36 posts were to be filled up, but only 33 posts were actually filled up, would not justify the remaining posts being filled up, since the Court cannot, ordinarily, order the respondents to fill up all the posts by way of promotion; and it was a policy matter. The writ petition was, accordingly, dismissed.