JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) This appeal by special leave seeks to
challenge the judgment and order dated 9.8.2012
rendered by a Division Bench of the Uttarakhand High
Court dismissing Writ Petition (S/B) No.153 of 2012.
That writ petition was filed by the appellant herein
seeking to challenge the appointment of respondent
No.4 herein to the post of Managing Director of the
Uttarakhand Peyjal Sanshadhan Vikas Avam Nirman
Nigam ("Nigam" for short). There were various
prayers in the writ petition. Prayer (A) was to call
for the record of the selection proceedings and
recommendations of the Selection Committee
constituted on 2.5.2012 by the Government of
Uttarakhand for selection to the post of Managing
Director and after examining the legality and
validity of selection process, recommendations to
quash these recommendations. Prayer (B) challenged
repatriation of the appellant to the post of Chief
Engineer which was his substantive post from his
officiating position of Managing Director. Prayer
(C) essentially sought consideration of the
appellant for the post of Managing Director, if
found fit for the said post.
(3.) The facts leading to this appeal are this
wise - The appellant as well as respondent No.4 both
joined as Assistant Engineers in the Respondent No.2
Nigam. The appellant joined sometimes in 1984
whereas respondent No.4 joined in 1977. Over the
years, they have risen in rank and the appellant,
who belongs to a Scheduled Caste, became
Superintending Engineer on 4.7.2002 whereas
respondent No.4 came to that position on 2.7.2008.
Subsequently the appellant became Chief Engineer on
8.2.2005 which post he is presently continuing to
occupy. As far as respondent No.4 is concerned, he
came in that position on 20.1.2011. He could become
Managing Director on 3.5.2012 pursuant to the
Departmental Promotion Committee's decision. The
appellant was officiating as the Managing Director
at the relevant time, he was amongst the officers
who were considered for promotion and it is his case
that he deserved to be selected and not the
respondent No.4.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.