Allahabad High Court
State Of Up & 2 Others vs Alok Kumar Singh And 12 Others on 2 May, 2024
Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:79154-DB
Court No. - 40
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 298 of 2024
Appellant :- State Of Up & 2 Others
Respondent :- Alok Kumar Singh And 12 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- C.S.C.,Kunal Ravi Singh,S.C.
Counsel for Respondent :- Kunal Shah
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
1. For the reasons stated in affidavit filed alongwith delay condonation application, which constitutes sufficient cause, the delay condonation application is allowed. The delay in filing the Special Appeal is hereby condoned.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants-respondents and Sri Kunal Shah, learned counsel for respondent-petitioner.
3. Present Special Appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of Allahabad High Court Rules 1952 is preferred against the impugned judgement and order dated 20.9.2023 in Writ A No. 3785 of 2023 (Alok Kumar Singh vs. State of U.P. and 14 Others), wherein, the respondent-petitioner who was holding the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the Department of Irrigation and Water Resources Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow had challenged the order dated 12.09.2022, impugned therein denying the claim for promotion as Executive Engineer on the ground that he did not fulfill the eligibility criteria of having minimum period of service to his credit as Assistant Engineer as required under the Uttar Pradesh Government Servants (Group A), Rules, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules 1990").
4. Sri Kunal Shah, learned counsel for the respondent-petitioner raised an objection that while pressing the claim set up by the respondent-petitioner, he has heavily relied upon the Division Bench judgement of this Court in Sanjeev Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P. and others 2018 (4) ADJ 366, wherein the similarly situated seven incumbents had challenged the order dated 27.06.2017 and order of promotion passed by the State Government dated 03.07.2017 of respective juniors to the petitioners. The said writ petition was partly allowed vide order dated 6.3.2018 directing the respondent nos. 1 to 3 to consider the case of the petitioners for grant of relaxation under proviso to Rule 4 of Relaxation Rules as amended in 2013 and on being favourable decision for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer with effect from the date of promotion of contesting respondent nos. 4 to 19 and the consequential benefits shall follow accordingly. He has further placed reliance upon paragraph 11 of the impugned judgement herein which reads as under.
"Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and having perused the records and looking to the bare undisputed facts relating to appointment, joining and seniority accorded to the petitioner by the respondents themselves, it is absolutely clear that petitioner's notional seniority and as such service has been counted from the date one Mr. Utkarsh Bhardwaj, next junior to the petitioner has been given appointment and jointing. The order passed by the competent authority in the matter, namely, Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department and Water Resources, Government of U.P. dated 08th January, 2018 has remained unchallenged, and therefore, remained undisputed. The then Principal Secretary, Mr. Suresh Chandra vide paragraph 5 of the order in a quite unequivocal terms placed the petitioner above Mr. Utkarsh Bhardwaj and below Mr. Sudhir Kumar Pal assigning serial no. 415-A. The relevant paragraph 5 is reproduced hereunder:
"??? ????????? ?? ???????? ?????????? ???? ???? ????? ????, ????? ???????? ?? ????????? ????????-????? ???- 599/???????-1-2014-91/10 ????, ?????? 04 ?????, 2014 ?????? ?????????? ?????? ????????? ???? ??? ???????-415 ?? ???????????? ???? ????? ????? ??? ??? ???????-416 ?? ???????????? ???? ??????? ???????? ?? ???? ???????-415(?) ?? ?????? ??? ?? ?????????? ?? ???? ???" "
5. Sri Shah further submits that the Division Bench judgement of this Court in Sanjeev Kumar (supra) has already been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 44591/2018 (Salil Kumar v. Sanjeev Kumar) with Diary No(s). 44538/2018 (XI) vide order dated 18.1.2019. In this backdrop, he submits that once the learned Single Judge has relied that the relief had already been extended to other incumbents of the Department concerned and the seniority list has not been assailed. In the said facts and circumstances, the learned Single Judge has set aside the order impugned directing the concerned competent respondent in the matter to confer the benefit of promotion upon petitioner w.e.f. date of his junior has been given promotion with all consequential benefits.
6. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties and upon perusing the impugned judgment and order, we notice that the same has been rendered by the learned Single Judge with cogent and justifiable reasons. In an Intra-Court Special Appeal, no interference is usually warranted unless palpable infirmities or perversities are noticed on a plain reading of the impugned judgment and order. In the facts and circumstances of the instant case, on a plain reading of the impugned judgment and order, we do not notice any such palpable infirmity or perversity. As such, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order.
7. In view of above, the special appeal sans merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 2.5.2024
A.K.Srivastava
