Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 2776 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 22 May, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

  HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                 Writ Petition No. 1664 of 2022 (S/S)

 Pramod Chandra Lohani
                                                             ........Petitioner

                                   Versus

 State of Uttarakhand and others
                                                            .....Respondents

 Present:-
        Mr. Maneesh Bisht, Advocate for the petitioner.
        Mr. Ganesh Kandpal, Deputy Advocate General for the State.


                                 Judgment

 Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this petition is made to the final

promotion list dated 05.08.2022 issued by the respondent no.

3/District Education Officer, Almora, with further direction to the

respondent authorities to consider the candidature of the petitioner for

promotion.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

3. The petitioner was working as an Assistant Teacher in

Primary School. In the year 2015, when the promotion exercise was

undertaken, the petitioner had to forgo that promotion due to his

family condition. Thereafter, again promotion exercise was undertaken

in the month of July, 2022, but the name of the petitioner was not

included in it. That has been challenged by the petitioner.

4. That the respondent no. 3/District Education Officer has

filed a short counter affidavit and in para 5 of it, it is stated as

follows:-

"5. That it is also pertinent to bring to the notice of this Hon'ble Court that by virtue of letter dated 13.9.2022 issued by Director, Primary Education it has been directed that the regulations regarding the forgo of promotion 2020 came into force on 7.8.2020, therefore, it is applicable from 7.8.2020 itself and the petitioner herein kept away from the promotional exercise is not justified and legally sustainable and also direct the answering respondent department to correct the aforesaid mistake and thereafter apprise the Hon'ble Court regarding the same."

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

earlier the petitioner had forgo his promotion, but that could not debar

inclusion of the petitioner in the promotion list for the year 2022.

6. In this mater, on 31.08.2022, when the matter was taken

up, the Court had directed that the petitioner's claim for promotion to

the post of Headmaster, Government Primary School, shall also be

considered however, his result shall not be declared, without leave of

this Court.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent State would submit

that after the interim order, the matter was examined and the senior

authorities has already directed that the name of the petitioner ought

to have been considered for the promotion exercise that was under

taken in the year 2022.

8. Today, the result of the promotion exercise has been

placed before the Court. It is in sealed cover, which is opened before

the Court. After opening it, on being asked, learned State Counsel

submits that the candidature of the petitioner was considered for

promotion to the post of Headmaster and he is found eligible; his place

of posting has not been notified due to pendency of the instant

petition.

9. It is the claim of the petitioner that his name should be

included in the promotion exercise for the year 2022. The candidature

of the petitioner has been considered and now he has been found

eligible. Therefore, nothing survives in the writ petition. However, the

respondents are directed to notify the place of posting of the petitioner

after promotion forthwith.

10. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 20.05.2025 Avneet/