HARI PRASAD GUPTA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition has been filed by petitioner assailing orders dt. 22nd May, 1995 [Ann. 8 & Ann. 9] passed by respondents whereby private respondents were promoted as UDC against the quota of 1981 82.

(2.) It will be pertinent to mention that orders were passed by the respondents in compliance of the decision of learned Service Appellate Tribunal dt. 4th October, 1989. However, appeals preferred before this Court were dismissed and Tribunal's order was finally upheld. It appears from the record that petitioner was apprehending his reversion from the post of UDC. But, later on holding review DPC, the petitioner has also been promoted as UDC against the vacancy of 1982-83 vide order dt. 24th October, 2002 - xerox copy whereof has been placed for perusal of this Court. In compliance thereto, orders dt. 22nd May, 1995 [Ann. 8 & Ann. 9] passed by the respondents, are under challenge.

(3.) Apart from it, it has been further averred by the respondents that post of UDC is to be filled 100% by promotion on the basis of seniority-cummerit and in terms of R.15, incumbent who is graduate on completion of 3 yrs. experience and non-graduate with 5 yrs. became eligible for promotion and the petitioner who was promoted on ad hoc basis since was not eligible, was reverted to substantive post of LDC w.e.f. 30th November, 1981. It was further alleged by petitioner that both the private respondent Nos. 3 & 4 are junior to him. But, there is no documentary evidence on record in support thereof. This fact has been disputed by the respondents in Para 12 of their reply.