SHAGUFTA PARVEEN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issues involved in all these writ petitions are identical, so they are taken up together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The Petitioners and private Respondents were appointed by way of promotion on the post of Senior Compilers in the year 1991 vide Order No. DF-ADM/78 of 1991 dated 11th November, 1991. The official Respondents appointed private Respondents by way of promotion on the post of Examiners vide Orders dated 13th October, 1997 and 17th October, 1997, which are impugned in these petitions.

(3.) The Petitioners feeling aggrieved of the promotion of private Respondents, have challenged these orders in these writ petitions, inter-alia, on the ground that the Petitioners were senior to private Respondents as they were appointed by way of promotion on the post of Senior Compilers and ranked ahead of private Respondents in the promotion order; the private Respondents were lacking requisite experience of six years as provided by statutory rules so could have not been appointed by way of promotion on the post of Examiners.