UDAI RAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Shri Ranjeet Saxena, learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the State Respondents. Shri V.P. Varshney appears for the Commission. The Respondent Nos. 4,5 and 6 are represented by Shri Pankaj Khare and Shri Shashi Bhushan and have filed their reply.

(2.) The Petitioner was appointed as Regional Inspector (Technical) under the Regional Transport Officer, Jhansi on 21.9.2001. By this writ petition he has prayed for directions to quash the Government Order dated 31.12.2008 only in respect of Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 issued by the Special Secretary, Transport, Government of U.P. promoting them as Asstt. Road Transport Officer (ARTO), which is a Class-II post. He has also prayed for direction to permit the Petitioner on the post of ARTO in the Transport Department of the Government of U.P.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case is that the Petitioner was appointed as Regional Inspector (Technical) under RTO Jhansi on 21.9.2001. His service conditions including promotions are governed by the U.P. Parivahan Sewa Niyamawali, 1990 (in short the Rules of 1990). The promotions under the rules to the post of ARTO is regulated by Rule 16 of the Rules of 1990, which provides: