CHANDRA KUMAR VATNANI Vs. CENTRAL SOCIAL WELFARE BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the validity of impugned order Annexure P/7 dated 1. 1. 2005 by which his services have been directed to be allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh.

(2.) THE contention of Shri Ahluwalia, learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is serving on the post of U. D. C. (Dwitiya Shreni Lipik) under the establishment of respondent No. 2. By inviting my attention to the gradation list enclosed along with the covering letter Annexure P/1 dated 8th May, 2002 it has been contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the name of the petitioner is at serial No. 7 in the gradation list. By inviting my attention to the name of Smt. Shakuntala Sharma and Shri R. K. Dwivedi who are at serial No. 2 and 3 and are serving on the post of Assistant Grade I and Head Clerk respectively, it has been contended by learned Counsel that these two posts are solitary posts as it is clear on going through column 8 of the gradation list. Thus according to learned Counsel there are only five posts of UDC and if according to the policy these posts are worked out it would come to 1. 31 and in the round figure it would be deemed to be a single post and therefore as the name of Prakash Soni is at serial No. 8, since he is junior to the petitioner, only he could have been allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh.

(3.) PER contra Shri Mrigendra Singh, learned Counsel for respondents has submitted that Prakash Soni has already been allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh. However, according to him the petitioner is also rightly allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh for the simple reason that the post of Smt. Shakantula Sharma and R. K. Dwivedi though they are serving on the post of Asstt. Grade I and Head Clerk respectively, but, their cadre continues to be of Upper Division Clerk as it would be evident from column 4 of the gradation list since they were promoted from the post of LDC to the post of First Grade Clerk and Head Clerk. Thus there were as many as 7 posts and if that would be the position, according to the policy if the situation is worked out, there would be two posts and therefore the petitioner as well as Prakash Soni has been rightly allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh. It has also been putforth by learned Counsel for the respondent that further promotion of the post of UDC is Account Assistant and all these seven persons are required to be considered for promotion to the post of Accountant. On these premised submissions, it has been contended by learned Counsel for the respondent that this petition be dismissed.