R.K. NIRMAL Vs. UHBVN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the order of his reversion dated 26.7.2010. Brief facts are that the petitioner was working as Assistant Engineer and had crossed the age of 50 years when he was promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. In the Rules, prevalent at that time, the following provision was there: - -

(2.) The case of the petitioner was considered for exemption from passing the Departmental Accounts Examination but not having been found favour with the respondents, he has been reverted, vide order dated 26.05.2010, which is to the following effect: - -

(3.) The precise argument of counsel for the petitioner is that though the petitioner may not have had a right for exemption but once the respondents had themselves provided that persons over 50 years of age would have a right to be considered for exemption, his prayer could not have been declined by the non -speaking order quoted above.