PAWAN RAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner No. 1 who is working as a Mazdoor and the petitioner No. 2 who is working as Mali, in the Office of the respondents No. 2 and 3, are before this Court with a prayer, amongst others, for setting aside and quashing the impugned Employment Notice dtd. 1/10/2018, as far as it relates to the filling up of one post of Fitter (Water Supply) and also for being considered for promotion to the vacancies in the said post.

(2.) The basis of the claim of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Fitter (Water Supply) is founded on their contention that the same is a promotional post and as such, the Employment Notice dtd. 1/10/2018, calling for direct recruitment to the said post is without jurisdiction and against the stated policy of the respondents.

(3.) The petitioners it appears from the records had approached this Court on an earlier occasion, against the same impugned Employment Notice vide WP(C) No. 93 of 2019, and on an affidavit being filed by the respondents, placing reliance on Rule 5(B) (3) and Rule 5(B) (5) of the Cantonment Fund Servants Rules, 1937, had then filed another writ petition being WP(C) No. 383 of 2019, for quashing the aforesaid Rules. These two writ petitions were then subsequently withdrawn by the petitioners with liberty to file afresh. Accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed challenging the validity of the decisions of the Cantonment Board, Shillong.