MAHENDRA RAI Vs. RAJENDRA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two petitioners have been fighting for justice and are looking for equality in matter of grant of promotion viz-a- viz other similarly situated employees, if not juniors to the petitioners. These petitioners as well as the private- respondents were all appointed on a Class-IV post over varied period of time relating to the decade of mid 70s. They have been performing the responsibility conferred upon them without their being anything adverse against them. Like all other employees they also had hopes and expectation from their employer, i.e., the university to treat them fairly, including grant of promotion, which has not been done, as is the averment in the Writ Application. Writ was filed in the years 2001, but was admitted for final hearing and is being taken up now for final disposal.

(2.) THE Court cannot ignore some significant observation, which had been recorded on 17.04.2008 by one of the Learned Single Judge, while adjourning the case for further consideration. The Court would like to reproduce some of this observation as it crystallizes the issue rather clearly:

(3.) PRIVATE -respondent No. 6 has been promoted on 01.07.1991. The order of promotion is Annexure ­ 8. Private-respondent No. 7's promotion order is contained in Annexure- 9, is dated 22.08.1996 and private-respondent nos. 8 was promoted on 07.08.1999, his order is Annexure ­ 15. A reading of these annexures would show that the promotion orders have not been passed limited to these respondents but contains whole lot of other names, who have been extended the benefit. They have all been promoted from Class-IV posts.