TEJ PRAKASH BHATNAGAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition was initially allowed by me on 4.12.2008 without hearing any one on behalf of respondent No. 3, the contesting respondent as no one had appeared on his behalf. Thereafter, rehearing application was filed which was allowed on 14.9.2009 and on the same date arguments of learned counsel for both the parties on the merit of the writ petition were also heard and judgment was reserved.

(2.) Certain paras of my judgment dated 4.12.2008 which deal with the facts of the case and the point involved are quoted below:

(3.) Learned counsel for the contesting respondents has cited a judgment dated 24.1.2008 delivered by a Division Bench of this Court in writ petition No. 53064 of 2006 B. C. Malviya and others v. State of U. P. and others and has supplied a photostat copy of certified copy of the said judgment. In the said case interpretation of Rule 22(3) of the Rules of 1985 was also involved. However, there was one more point involved in the said case which was in respect of interpretation of an earlier judgment. Contesting respondent in the said case had been promoted in the year 1985 prospectively. He filed writ petition claiming promotion w.e.f. 1983 when his juniors or colleagues were promoted and the writ petition was dismissed. The judgment dated 24.1.2008 is based upon both the points. Firstly, it has been held that in view of dismissal of earlier writ petition filed by the contesting respondent of the said case, he could not claim seniority over those persons in the same cadre who had been promoted in 1983. The second point which had been decided was that the said rule applies only to one selection. Last few paragraphs of the said judgment are quoted below: