SATISH KUMAR Vs. RAJASTHAN SCHEDULED CASTES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants have filed this appeal challenging the order dated 08.09.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby, writ petition filed by the private respondents No. 2 to 6 was allowed.

(2.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has submitted that the writ petition filed by the private respondents was liable to be dismissed, as the decision taken by Respondent No. 1-Rajasthan Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Finance and Development Co-operative Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') with regard to the promotions-in-question had not been challenged. Private respondents had participated in the process of promotion and could not challenge the same at a later stage. Private respondents had not qualified the examination undertaken by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. Hence, they were not eligible for promotion. Appellants were working as Junior Accountants since the year 1995 and at this stage could not be made to work as Lower Division Clerk. The pattern of recruitment was to be considered by the Corporation and the Corporation in its wisdom had taken the necessary decision for filling up the posts of Junior Accountant.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of private respondents has submitted that vide order dated 28.04.1995, applications were invited for posting the applicants to the posts of Junior Accountant. Order dated 28.04.1995 does not reflect that a proposal had been made for promotion of the candidates from clerical level to the posts of Junior Accountant. Impugned order of promotion dated 08.05.1995 had been passed without holding any written test or interview. The examination undertaken by the private respondents in the year 1983, 1990 and 1992 had been taken in consideration, although, the said examination had not been taken for the purpose of promotion process-in-question. Applications were submitted by the appellants on 28.03.1995 for their promotion as Junior Accountant, whereas, the applications for posting to the posts of Junior Accountant were invited on 28.04.1995. Criteria for promotion was laid down by the Corporation on 25.11.1995, much after the applications for posting to the posts of Junior Accountant were invited. Thus, the whole process was carried out to favour the appellants and to defeat the rights of the private respondents, who were senior to the appellants and were working on the posts of Lower Division Clerk and Upper Division Clerk. It was the stand of the Corporation also in Communication dated 28.05.1999 that the promotions vide order dated 08.05.1995 had not been made in accordance with the rules.