MALKHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these three writ petitions are connected involving common questions of law and fact and therefore, as requested and agreed by learned counsel for the parties are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) THE writ petition No. 44379 of 2008 the first in point of time was filed by one Sukhbir Singh. THE orders dated 6.6.2008 and 16.6.2008 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Gautambudh Nagar (hereinafter referred to as DIOS) (Annexure 4 and 5 to the writ petition), have been assailed by the petitioner.

(3.) THE DIOS in its counter-affidavit has said that one Ranvir Singh was senior to the petitioner as Class IV employee having been appointed on 28.8.1972, the petitioner was rightly denied promotion even though he was a Scheduled Caste and possess educational qualification of Intermediate. It further says that the post of Head Clerk is to be filled in by promotion and therefore, in the category of Assistant Clerk only one post could have been filled in by promotion. No promotio On ever could be made on the post of Head Clerk since no Assistant Clerk having experience of five years was available which is the condition of eligibility under the Regulations, hence, it was vacant but that would not make the petitioner entitle to claim promotion on the post of Assistant Clerk. Hence the appointment of respondent No. 4 Rahul Awana has rightly been made on compassionate basis being as a direct recruitee. He has also said in para 14 that vacant post of Assistant Clerk was reserved for Backward candidate and thus the appointment of respondent No. 5 was made by the DIOS.