GH MOHD BHAT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS case is that they were promoted as Head Assistants by duly constituted Departmental promotion Committee. No condition was placed on their promotion. They however, continued to draw pay as Sr. Assistants while discharging their duties as Head Assistants. A circular is said to have been issued by the General Department on 5 -1 -1984 providing that unless a Sr. Assistant undergoes sectetariat training and passes the same, he shall not be eligible for promotion as Head Assistant, Copy of this circular is annexure P -II to the petition. However, rules were not amended in this behalf. Four petitioners were nominated for training which was to, start from 5 -1 -1985 copy, whereof is annexure -III to the petition. The other petitioners were not nominated despite their willingness to under go the training, but they were not provided an opportunity to undergo the training. The General Department refused admission to the petitioners for the session 1986 for undergoing the training. The bar of undergoing secretariat training is said to be bad and this was applied selectively in some cases without insisting for the said training, people were appointed. There was no rule or amendment which made the secretariat training imperative for promotion.

(2.) RIGHT to file the counter was granted on the condition which is recorded in order dated 27 -3 -1987. Counter was not filed, therefore the respondents lost the right to file the counter. This petition is consequently being heard without counter.

(3.) BY virtue of Annexure -l which is order dated 19 -3 -1985 it is revealed that petitioners, except petitioner No. 10 were put in charge Head Assistants in their own pay and grade. Their promotion Was subject to the clearance from the secretariat training class examination. In the event of non -clearance by any of the petitioners, they had to forfeit the claim for formal promotion.