[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Committee Of Management vs Asha Ram Ghansela & Ors on 10 March, 2026
2024:UHC:5578-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
AND
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY
March 10, 2026
Restoration Application (MCC No.2/2024)
In
Special Appeal No.194 of 2021
Committee of Management ---Appellant
Versus
Asha Ram Ghansela & Ors. ---Respondents
--------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant
Mr. Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for respondent no.1
Ms. Rajni Supyal, learned Brief Holder for the State/respondent nos.2, 3 and 4
--------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT:
(per Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)
Restoration Application (MCC No.2/2024)
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The cause shown for non-appearance on
07.08.2024 is found to be sufficient. Accordingly, order dated
07.08.2024, dismissing the special appeal in default, is
hereby recalled. The appeal is restored to its original
number.
3. The instant appeal is filed by the Committee of
Management of the Institution against the judgment and
2024:UHC:5578-DB
order of learned Single Judge dated 10.05.2021 passed in
WPSS No.285/2019.
4. The facts, in brief, are that non-appellant no.1
(hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner) assailed an
advertisement dated 29.12.2018 published by the appellant
for filling up one post of Assistant Clerk in the Intermediate
College, Dhaundkhal, District Pauri Garhwal. The case of the
writ petitioner was that there was only one sanctioned post
of Assistant Clerk in the College and therefore it should be
filled only by promotion. It was also his case that Surendra
Singh (non-appellant no.5) though senior to him, was not
interested in promotion and, therefore, he being next to him,
should be promoted on the vacant Class III post; however,
the Committee of Management was wrongly proceeding to fill
up the said post through direct recruitment. Learned Single
Judge took into consideration Regulation 2(2) of Chapter
Three of the Regulations framed under the School Education
Act, 2006 in holding that when there was only one
sanctioned post of Class III in the Institution, it could be
filled only through promotion and not by direct recruitment.
Accordingly, the advertisement impugned in the writ petition,
was quashed. Learned Single Judge, however, refused to
direct the Committee of Management to consider only the
writ petitioner for promotion but directed it to consider all
eligible candidates.
2024:UHC:5578-DB
5. Aggrieved by the latter part of the direction issued
by the writ court, the writ petitioner filed Special Appeal
No.171/2021 before this Court. The appeal filed by the writ
petitioner has been decided by a Coordinate Bench by
judgment dated 21.06.2021. In the said appeal, the
Coordinate Bench endorsed the interpretation made by the
learned Single to Regulation 2 of Chapter Three and has held
that since there was one post in the Institution and therefore
it could be filled only through promotion. The direction given
by learned Single Judge that while according consideration to
the eligibility of candidates for promotion the case of
respondent no.5 would also be considered along with that of
the original writ petitioner, has also been approved.
6. After the appeal filed by the writ petitioner was
dismissed, the Committee of Management preferred the
instant appeal.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
Regulation does not provide that every time a class III post
is filled up, it should be through promotion only, even if there
was one post in the Institution. He submits that the
Committee of Management had advertised the post for being
filled up through direct recruitment as in the past it was filled
by promotion.
8. Learned Single Judge in paragraph nos.13 and 14
2024:UHC:5578-DB
of his judgment, has interpreted Regulation 2 of Chapter III
of the Regulations framed under the Act in the following
manner:-
"13. What is being argued is that since last time the post
was filled up by way of promotion, this time the respondent
no.4 resolved to fill up the post by way of direct recruitment
and it was accordingly approved by the respondent no.3.
But, can it be done? The answer is in negative, for the
simple reason that the Regulations do not provide that in
case of single post, if once the post had been filled up by
way of promotion, on the second time it may be filled up by
way of direct recruitment and so on. Regulation 2 of Chapter
three of the Regulations is clear on this point. It provides
that 50% of the sanctioned posts of the clerical cadre shall
be filled up by way of promotion from amongst eligible
Group IV employees. It does not stop here. The comment
appended to Sub-Regulation (2) of Regulation 2 makes it
further clear that while computing 50%, less than half shall
be ignored, but half or more than half shall be counted as
one.
14. In the instant case there is only one post. According to
Sub-Regulation (2) of Regulation 2, 50% of the post is to be
filled up by way of promotion. 50% of "one" is "half".
According to the comment appended to Sub-Regulation (2)
of Regulation 2, "half" will be counted as "one". Therefore,
this "half" shall be construed as "one post" and it has to be
filled up by way of promotion. Accordingly this Court is of
the view that the single post of Assistant Clerk in the school
has to be filled up by way of promotion in view of Sub-
Regulation (2) of Regulation 2 of the Regulations.
Respondent nos.1 to 4 did not 6 construe the Regulations
properly. Accordingly, the advertisement deserves to be
quashed."
9. Regulation 2 regulates the filling up of post of
2024:UHC:5578-DB
Class III employees in an Institution. The earlier part of the
Regulation deals with filling up of the post of Head Clerk. The
latter part regulates the filling up of vacancies of Class III
posts in an Institution in clerical category and it categorically
provides that same shall be filled up by promotion from
amongst the Class IV employees working in the Institution to
the extent of 50% of the total number of vacancies. The note
appended to Sub-Regulation (2) of Regulation 2 is as
follows:-
"Note- In computing the fifty percent posts, less than
half of the posts shall be ignored and half or more
than half of the posts shall be treated as one."
10. Concededly, in the instant case, the Institution is
having only one sanctioned post in the clerical category.
Consequently, it was to be filled up only through promotion
from amongst class IV employees.
11. The Regulation does not provide that the post
shall be filled up by following any policy of rotation, so that if
in any particular year it was filled by promotion, in
subsequent year, it would be filled by direct recruitment. The
situation for filling up the vacancy by direct recruitment
would have arisen only if there was no eligible Class IV
candidate available, which is not the case here. Thus, the
contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the
Committee of Management was rightly proceeding for filling
2024:UHC:5578-DB
up the post through direct recruitment, is without any
substance and is, accordingly, rejected. The appeal lacks
merit and is hereby dismissed.
(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.)
(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.)
Dated: 10.03.2026
Rajni
RAJINI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db4844
8ac3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17d0
GUSAIN
1342, postalCode=263001,
st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4D
F4FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F530616A
158A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN
Date: 2026.03.11 15:08:30 +05'30'
