WPSB/455/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 4440 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN
                            AND
       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARAYAN SINGH DHANIK


           Writ Petition (S/B) No. 455 of 2021


                      8TH NOVEMBER, 2021
 Between:

 Abhishek Arya
                                                      ...Petitioner
 and

 State of Uttarakhand and others
                                                 ...Respondents

 Mr. C.K. Sharma and Mr. Dushyant Mainali, the learned counsel
 for the petitioner.

 Mr. Anil Kumar Bisht, the learned Additional Chief Standing
 Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

 JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Raghvendra Singh Chauhan)

             The petitioner has challenged the order dated

 13.09.2021, whereby           Mr.    Jaideep Arora,        the Joint

 Director, Dairy Development Department, Uttarakhand,

 the respondent no. 5, has been the additional charge of

 the post of Managing Director.

 2.          Mr. C.K. Sharma, the learned counsel for the

 petitioner, submits that Mr. Arora could not have been

 given the additional charge as he is not qualified to hold

 the post of Managing Director. Therefore, the petitioner
 has filed this writ of quo warranto challenging the grant

of additional charge to Mr. Arora.

3.        The very contention raised by learned counsel

is highly misplaced. For, when an additional charge is

given to the Joint Director, it is merely a stopgap

arrangement till the post of Managing Director is filled

through a regular selection process. When an additional

charge is given to an employee, it is not necessary that

the employee must have all the eligibility criteria for

filling up the post. Therefore, even if the respondent no.

5 may not have the eligibility criteria for holding the post

of Managing Director, even then the grant of an

additional charge to respondent no. 5 is not illegal.

4.        Admittedly, the selection process has already

commenced      but   during   this   selection   process,   an

additional charge has been given to the respondent no.

5. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in this

writ petition. It is hereby dismissed.


                 _____________________________
                 RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, C.J.


                                            ___________
                                            N.S. Dhanik, J.

Dt: 08th November, 2021 Shiksha