ARJUN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is continuation of a grievance which started with the Writ Petition No. 3375/74.

(2.) The petitioner and respondent no. 3 are confirmed Superintending Engineers and are members of the service under Rajasthan Service of Engineers (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1954 (hereinafter to be called the "1954 Rules" ). Respondent No. 3 had been promoted as an Additional Chief Engineer on 9-7-70 and the petitioner on 24.7-71. Subsequently both of them had been selected by the Departmental Promotion Committee in March/April, 1972. The order of 19-5-72 appointing the petitioner and respondent No. 3 shows the petitioner junior to respondent No. 3. The petitioner had filed writ petition No. 3375/74 challenging the order on the ground that the seniority had been shown wrongly and that he was entitled to be appointed earlier against the merit vacancy in 1970. I have in the connected writ petition today held otherwise against the petitioner. That writ petition was filed on 16.12.74. Earlier to this a post of Chief Engineer having fallen vacant respondent No. 3 was promoted to this. on ad hoc basis on 1-3.74. The petitioner in the said writ petition had made a grievance that not only during the pendency of the petition respondent No. 3 was being shown as senior but had also got a further advantage be being promoted as Chief Engineer while the post should have gone to the petitioner On 17.12-74 a etay order had been given by this Court that during the pendency of the writ petition respondent No. 3 will not be confirmed as Chief Engineer. On 18-3-75 this Court further directed the Government to hold a meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee for the purpose of promotion to the post of a Chief Engineer and directed the case to be put up 4 weeks later. On the next date i.e. on 21.4.75 a copy of the order dated 19-4.75 by which respondent 3 had been selected as a Chief Engineer by Departmental Promotion Committee was produced and the stay was therefore rejected. This apparentlyled the petitioner to file the present writ petition impugning the order dated 19-4-75 by which the respondent No. 3 has been promoted as Chief Engineer by virtue of rule 26 of 1954 rules.

(3.) Part V deals with the procedure for-recruitment by promotion. Rule 23 (1) provided a criterion for selection of those eligible on the basis of seniority.cum-merit. Sub rule (2) of rule 23 provided for various criteria which was to be borne in mind in selecting the candidates for promotion. On 14.12.65 the Governor of Rajasthan in exercise of the powers under Art. 309 of the Constitution made the Rajasthan Various Services (Amendment) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter to be called. "the 1965 Rules"). By the said rules Rule 23 (2) was deleted from the 1954 Rules and a new rule viz.. rule 24A was inserted. It may be mentioned that rule 24A (1) provided that appointment by promotion to posts in the service shall be made by selection strictly on the basis of merit and on the basis of seniority-cum-merit in proportion of 50:50 (this was however changed to the proportion of 1:2 by notification of 26 8.66). Rule 26 which was substituted from 26-4-67 provided for appointments including officiating appointments to senior posts including that of the Chief Engineer to be made on the basis of merit and seniority-cum-merit in the ratio of 1:2.