Uttarakhand High Court
Committee Of Management vs Asha Ram Ghansela & Ors on 10 March, 2026
2024:UHC:5578-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
AND
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY
March 10, 2026
Restoration Application (MCC No.2/2024)
In
Special Appeal No.194 of 2021
Committee of Management ---Appellant
Versus
Asha Ram Ghansela & Ors. ---Respondents
--------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant
Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for respondent no.1
Ms. Rajni Supyal, learned Brief Holder for the State/respondent nos.2, 3 and 4
--------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT:(per Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.) Restoration Application (MCC No.2/2024)
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The cause shown for non-appearance on 07.08.2024 is found to be sufficient. Accordingly, order dated 07.08.2024, dismissing the special appeal in default, is hereby recalled. The appeal is restored to its original number.
Special Appeal No.194 of 2021
3. The instant appeal is filed by the Committee of Management of the Institution against the judgment and 1 2024:UHC:5578-DB order of learned Single Judge dated 10.05.2021 passed in WPSS No.285/2019.
4. The facts, in brief, are that non-appellant no.1 (hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner) assailed an advertisement dated 29.12.2018 published by the appellant for filling up one post of Assistant Clerk in the Intermediate College, Dhaundkhal, District Pauri Garhwal. The case of the writ petitioner was that there was only one sanctioned post of Assistant Clerk in the College and therefore it should be filled only by promotion. It was also his case that Surendra Singh (non-appellant no.5) though senior to him, was not interested in promotion and, therefore, he being next to him, should be promoted on the vacant Class III post; however, the Committee of Management was wrongly proceeding to fill up the said post through direct recruitment. Learned Single Judge took into consideration Regulation 2(2) of Chapter Three of the Regulations framed under the School Education Act, 2006 in holding that when there was only one sanctioned post of Class III in the Institution, it could be filled only through promotion and not by direct recruitment. Accordingly, the advertisement impugned in the writ petition, was quashed. Learned Single Judge, however, refused to direct the Committee of Management to consider only the writ petitioner for promotion but directed it to consider all eligible candidates.
2
2024:UHC:5578-DB
5. Aggrieved by the latter part of the direction issued by the writ court, the writ petitioner filed Special Appeal No.171/2021 before this Court. The appeal filed by the writ petitioner has been decided by a Coordinate Bench by judgment dated 21.06.2021. In the said appeal, the Coordinate Bench endorsed the interpretation made by the learned Single to Regulation 2 of Chapter Three and has held that since there was one post in the Institution and therefore it could be filled only through promotion. The direction given by learned Single Judge that while according consideration to the eligibility of candidates for promotion the case of respondent no.5 would also be considered along with that of the original writ petitioner, has also been approved.
6. After the appeal filed by the writ petitioner was dismissed, the Committee of Management preferred the instant appeal.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Regulation does not provide that every time a class III post is filled up, it should be through promotion only, even if there was one post in the Institution. He submits that the Committee of Management had advertised the post for being filled up through direct recruitment as in the past it was filled by promotion.
8. Learned Single Judge in paragraph nos.13 and 14 3 2024:UHC:5578-DB of his judgment, has interpreted Regulation 2 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the Act in the following manner:-
"13. What is being argued is that since last time the post was filled up by way of promotion, this time the respondent no.4 resolved to fill up the post by way of direct recruitment and it was accordingly approved by the respondent no.3. But, can it be done? The answer is in negative, for the simple reason that the Regulations do not provide that in case of single post, if once the post had been filled up by way of promotion, on the second time it may be filled up by way of direct recruitment and so on. Regulation 2 of Chapter three of the Regulations is clear on this point. It provides that 50% of the sanctioned posts of the clerical cadre shall be filled up by way of promotion from amongst eligible Group IV employees. It does not stop here. The comment appended to Sub-Regulation (2) of Regulation 2 makes it further clear that while computing 50%, less than half shall be ignored, but half or more than half shall be counted as one.
14. In the instant case there is only one post. According to Sub-Regulation (2) of Regulation 2, 50% of the post is to be filled up by way of promotion. 50% of "one" is "half".
According to the comment appended to Sub-Regulation (2) of Regulation 2, "half" will be counted as "one". Therefore, this "half" shall be construed as "one post" and it has to be filled up by way of promotion. Accordingly this Court is of the view that the single post of Assistant Clerk in the school has to be filled up by way of promotion in view of Sub- Regulation (2) of Regulation 2 of the Regulations. Respondent nos.1 to 4 did not 6 construe the Regulations properly. Accordingly, the advertisement deserves to be quashed."
9. Regulation 2 regulates the filling up of post of 4 2024:UHC:5578-DB Class III employees in an Institution. The earlier part of the Regulation deals with filling up of the post of Head Clerk. The latter part regulates the filling up of vacancies of Class III posts in an Institution in clerical category and it categorically provides that same shall be filled up by promotion from amongst the Class IV employees working in the Institution to the extent of 50% of the total number of vacancies. The note appended to Sub-Regulation (2) of Regulation 2 is as follows:-
"Note- In computing the fifty percent posts, less than half of the posts shall be ignored and half or more than half of the posts shall be treated as one."
10. Concededly, in the instant case, the Institution is having only one sanctioned post in the clerical category. Consequently, it was to be filled up only through promotion from amongst class IV employees.
11. The Regulation does not provide that the post shall be filled up by following any policy of rotation, so that if in any particular year it was filled by promotion, in subsequent year, it would be filled by direct recruitment. The situation for filling up the vacancy by direct recruitment would have arisen only if there was no eligible Class IV candidate available, which is not the case here. Thus, the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the Committee of Management was rightly proceeding for filling 5 2024:UHC:5578-DB up the post through direct recruitment, is without any substance and is, accordingly, rejected. The appeal lacks merit and is hereby dismissed.
(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 10.03.2026 Rajni Digitally signed by RAJINI GUSAIN RAJINI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db4844 8ac3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17d0 GUSAIN 1342, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4D F4FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F530616A 158A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2026.03.11 15:08:30 +05'30' 6