RAMESH CHANDRA PATHAK Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -A short question which arises for consideration is that as to whether a senior person in the feeding cadre if promoted subsequent to his juniors on next higher post can regain his seniority as it was in feeding cadre on his such subsequent promotion?

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the case is that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Junior Clerk in the Office of Laghu Krishak Vikas Abhikaran, Gorakhpur on 14/15.11.1980 on regular basis after due process of selection, and by efflux of time the persons appointed as Junior Clerk in Laghu Krishak Vikas Abhikaran were redesignated as Junior Accounts Clerk on its redesignation as Zila Gramya Vikas Abhikaran. THEreafter the petitioner was given promotion to the next higher post of Assistant Accountant vide order dated 23.11.1990. Next promotion from the post of Assistant Accountant is the post of Accountant. A tentative seniority list for the post of Assistant Accountant was published on 13.6.1996 inviting objection against the said seniority list. THE petitioner moved his representation/ objection against the said tentative seniority list on 24.7.1996. THEreafter a final seniority list was published by the respondent vide covering letter dated 1.9.1998 (Anneuxre-6 to the writ petition). THEreafter on the basis of aforesaid seniority list promotion order from the post of Assistant Accountant to the post of Accountant was issued vide order dated 10.11.1999 (Annexure-7 of the writ petition) from the office of Commissioner, Gramya Vikas, U. P. Lucknow. THE petitioner moved a representation to the Commissioner, Gramya Vikas, U. P. Lucknow on 12.11.1999 and ultimately filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 51833 of 1999 earlier to it. While deciding writ petition vide judgment and order dated 10.12.1999, this Court has directed the respondent to decide representation dated 12.11.1999 moved by the petitioner before respondent No. 2. In compliance of the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the Commissioner, Gramya Vikas, U. P. Lucknow respondent No. 2 vide impugned order dated 10.8.2000 (Annexure-10 to the writ petition) has rejected the aforesaid representation of the petitioner, hence this petition.

(3.) SRI A. P. Tewari has further submitted that although impugned seniority list it has been drawn purporting it to be under 1991 Rules but in fact while determining the inter se seniority of members of service of Assistant Accountant the provisions of Rule 6 has not been adhered to and seniority list was not drawn in conformity of Rule 6 of 1991 Rules. While substantiating his submission he has placed reliance upon a chart shown in para 4 of the supplementary affidavit filed in the writ petition, whereby he has demonstrated that the persons mentioned therein, though promoted earlier to the petitioner on the post of Assistant Accountant but they were appointed on the post of feeding cadre i.e., Junior Accounts Clerk subsequent to the appointment of petitioner and they were junior to the petitioner on the said post of Junior Accounts Clerk. However, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Assistant Accountant subsequent to them but once he has been promoted on the post of Assistant Accountant even subsequently from the promotion of aforesaid persons he will regain his seniority position on the post of Assistant Accountant as it was in feeding cadre of Junior Accounts Clerk, and he should be treated to be senior to the aforesaid persons mentioned in para 4 of the supplementary affidavit on the post of Assistant Accountant. In my opinion, the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner appears to have some substance and requires to be examined.