Uttarakhand High Court
Satya Prakash & Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 5 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (S/S) No.70 of 2016
Satya Prakash & others .......Petitioners
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand & others .....Respondents
Mrs. Bina Pandey, Advocate with Mrs. Preeta Bhatt, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. N.S. Pundir, Deputy Advocate General, for the State of Uttarakhand.
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J (Oral)
Before this Court proceeds to decide the matter on
its own merit, a statement is recorded of the learned counsel
for the petitioners, that petitioner no.1, has met with the sad
demise. Hence, this writ petition would be treated to be
dismissed qua the petitioner no.1, and the judgment rendered,
herein, would be confined to petitioner nos.2 and 3, only.
2. The brief facts of the case which requires
references, are that in pursuance to the process of recruitment
of Class IV employee in the Treasury Department of District
Pauri Garhwal, the petitioners were recruited as a Class IV
employees, and accordingly, they worked and it is the
contention of the petitioners that, at the time of their
induction into services, their service conditions were
governed by the Uttarakhand Treasury Subordinate Cadre
Service Rules of 2003, and as per Rules, which were then
prevalent at the time of the induction of the petitioners into
the services, as Class IV employee, there was a promotional
avenues which was made available to be considered for
promotion, subject to the fulfillment of the eligibility criteria
provided under the rules, applicable to the post of Accounts
Clerk.
3. But, however, subsequently there was a
legislative change, and the Rules of 2003 has been amended
by the State vide its Gazette Notification dated 25th June,
2013, resulting into an enforcement of the Rules called as
"Uttarakhand Treasury Subordinate Cadre Services
(Amendment Rules) of 2013, the consequential effect of the
amendment carried under Rule 5(A) of the Rules of 2003, by
the amending Rules of 2013, the promotional avenues to the
post of Accounts Clerk from amongst Class IV employee,
was declared as to be a dying cadre, as an effect of the
declaration of the post as a dying cadre, the petitioners who
were recruited as a Class IV employees, their avenues of
promotion was closed for all times to come, but, however, the
Rules of 2013 in its clause 6 (2) provided, that 25% post of
Class III posts, would be filled in by way of promotion from
amongst the eligible candidates.
4. However, the impact of the Rules of 2013, closing
the avenue of promotion, came up for consideration before
the coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition being
WPSS No.320 of 2014, "Lalit Singh Kharayat Vs. State of
Uttarakhand & others", and considering the issue from
various prospectives, which has been dealt by the coordinate
Bench of this Court, the coordinate Bench has carved out an
exception, whereby the deprivation of the consideration of
Class IV employee from to be considered for promotion, an
exception was carved out, from the view point that the State
was directed to frame a Scheme in order to provide a fair
chance of promotion to the petitioners on the post of
Assistant Accountant, subject to the riders attached, therein,
as per the observations made in paragraph nos.6, 7 and 8, of
the said judgment, which is extracted hereunder:-
"6. Another fact which has been brought to the notice
of this Court was that the amended rules were brought
on 25.06.2013 whereas in Udham Singh Nagar
Treasury a post of Accounts Clerk fell vacant on
22.06.2013 i.e. prior to two days when this amended
rules had not become effective. Therefore, there was a
post available to the petitioner in any case on
22.06.2013, thereafter the post itself has merged with
the post of Assistant Accountant.
7. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the
respondents must frame scheme giving fair chance of
promotion to the petitioner, which can only now be
done to the post of Assistant Accountant. This Court
has been informed that there are total 326 posts of
Assistant Accountant in the different Treasuries in
Uttarakhand are vacant. The Government can fix
certain percentage of posts for promotion from
eligible Class-IV employees, after fixing a prescribed
qualification and if need be a qualifying test, so that
eligible and competent candidate may be given
opportunity of promotion to that post.
8. Let the needful be done as expeditiously as
possible, though no interference is being made in the
amended Rules of 2003."
5. The judgment of the learned coordinate Bench of
this Court dated 17.12.2015, as rendered in WPSS No.320 of
2014, was challenged before the Division Bench of this Court
in Special Appeal No.239 of 2016, the Division Bench has
dismissed the Special Appeal of the State by the judgment of
05.10.2018. Thus attaching finality to the directions issued by
the coordinate Bench of this Court, directing the respondents
to frame the scheme and to venture out the avenues of
promotion to be provided to the Class IV employees, like that
of the petitioners.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits, that
so far, as the petitioners claim is concerned, that would fall to
be well within an ambit of consideration, as per the directions
issued by the coordinate Bench of this Court, in its judgment
dated 17.12.2015. Though, a doubt is being created by the
respondent Counsel, that he is not very sure as to that against
the judgment of the Division Bench, whether any SLP has
been preferred before the Hon'ble Apex Court or not? But
there is nothing to the contrary on record, to substantiate his
anticipated apprehension.
7. In that eventuality, since the factual backdrop of
the instant case falls, to be well within the directives of the
coordinate Bench judgment dated 17.12.2015, this writ
petition too would stands disposed of under the same terms
and conditions as observed in paragraph nos.6, 7 and 8 of the
judgment, extracted above, which was later on affirmed by
the Division Bench, but only a precaution which has been
observed is that the compliance of the direction of the learned
Single Judge; would be only subject to the condition that its
affirmation made by the Division Bench of this Court on
05.10.2018, has not been disturbed by the Hon'ble Apex
Court, in any further proceedings drawn by the respondents.
8. Subject to the aforesaid, this writ petition is
disposed of in terms of the judgment of 17.12.2015. The
respondents would ensure its compliance within two months,
from date of service of this judgment.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
05.08.2022
NR/
