MOHD IZARAYAL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed as collection Amin in agriculture department on 24.12.69. He was retrenched on 1.9.75. On 3.1.77 he was appointed as collection amin in the revenue department. He was confirmed on 1.1.89. He claims that juniors to him mentioned in paragraph 4 of the writ petition have been promoted as naib tehsildar. Therefore, he is entitled to be promoted as naib tehsildar. After counter-affidavit was filed by the respondents annexing the Government Order dated 7.7.80. petitioner filed amendment application challenging Government Order dated 7.7.80 to be violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution. The amendment application has been allowed. The petitioner claims that he is entitled for promotion on the post of naib tehsildar and Government Order dated 7.7.80 is liable to be struck down.

(2.) I have heard Shri Sant Sharan Sharma learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri V. J. Sahal learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the petitioner was appointed as collection amin in the agriculture department, thereafter, he was appointed as collection amin in the revenue department. He was having Hen on the post of collection amin while he was working in the agriculture department. And his service for the period during which he worked in the agriculture department was liable to be counted while fixing his seniority in the revenue department where subsequently he was appointed as collection amin. Learned counsel for the petitioner further urged that if his seniority is fixed by counting his past service it will be established that the Juniors to the petitioner have been promoted as naib tehsildar and he would be entitled for promotion as naib tehsildar.