Uttarakhand High Court
3 August vs Oil And Natural Gas on 13 August, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
2025:UHC:7118-DB
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition Service Bench No. 323 of 2015
13 August, 2025
Anil Kumar Aggarwal --Petitioner
Versus
Oil and Natural Gas
Corporation Ltd. (ONGC) & another --Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Neeraj Garg, learned counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the respondents.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Hon'ble Subhash Upadhyay, J.
(Per: Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
JUDGMENT
This writ petition was filed in 2015 seeking
the following reliefs:-
"a) Issue a writ or direction quashing the impugned
office order dated 14.11.2014 (Annexure No.1 to the
writ petition), particularly component (ix) so far it
relates to promotion to E-6 level, declaring it to be
violative of Article 14, 16 & 21 of the Constitution of
India and violative of ONGC Recruitment and
Promotion Regulation Act, 1980.
b) Issue a writ or direction quashing the
impugned order dated 14.12.2014 passed by
respondent no.1 on representation/appeal preferred
by the petitioner.
c) Issue a writ or direction quashing the
impugned order dated 23.03.2015 passed by the
respondent no.1 on the representation/appeal
preferred by the petitioner.
d) Issue a writ or direction in the nature of
2025:UHC:7118-DB
mandamus directing the respondents to consider the
candidature of petitioner for promotion to E-6 level
w.e.f. 01.01.2014.
e) Issue a writ or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing the respondents to pay all
consequential benefits, allowances, salary etc., to the
petitioner w.e.f. 01.01.2014."
2. At the time of filing of writ petition,
petitioner was serving as Chief Manager (Human
Resource) in E-5 level, in Oil and Natural Gas
Corporation. The next promotional post available to
petitioner was to E-6 level; petitioner was considered
for promotion, however, promotion was denied to him
on the ground that he could not secure the minimum
cut off marks, necessary for selection.
3. In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged
the rejection order dated 23.03.2015. He has also
challenged the office order dated 14.11.2024, whereby
criteria for promotion was fixed.
4. At the time of filing of writ petition, petitioner
was 58 years of age. Now ten years have gone by since
filing of the writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner fairly submits
that petitioner has attained the age of superannuation.
After superannuation, the relief as claimed, cannot be
granted.
6. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
(Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
13.08.2025
Navin
NAVEEN Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15,
postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
CHANDRA
serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAAB21
CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA
Date: 2025.08.14 10:26:50 +05'30'
