- (1.) HEARD Counsel for the peti­tioner and Standing Counsel.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submits that aggrieved by the unjustified action of the re­spondents in denying promotion on Group-C post, the petitioner preferred a writ petition no. 2320 [ss] of 2005. This Court vide its or­der dated 23.3.2005 has directed the District Magistrate, Hardoi to consider the represen­tation of the petitioner. The District Magis­trate, Hardoi vide its impugned order dated 6.7.2005 rejected the representation of the petitioner on the ground that since the peti­tioner does not have the required knowledge of typing in view of Rule 8(2) of the Rules, 2001, he cannot be promoted on Group-C post and he can be promoted on a future date when he attains the required knowledge of typing. It has been argued by the petitioner's Counsel that the petitioner, who is a Class IV employee is entitled to be promoted on Group 'C Post in view of the Uttar Pradesh Subor­dinate Officers Ministerial Group 'C' Posts of the Lower Grade ]Recruitment by Pro­motion] Rules, 2001 [in short, referred to as '2001 Rules'] but his promotion has been ignored on the ground that, the petitioner has not appeared in the typing test. He has next contended that though he has not sought pro­motion on the post of Typist but other than Typist yet the opposite parties have denied his legitimate claim whereas two persons, namely, Munni Lal and Raghuwar Singh were promoted from amongst Class IV on the post of Typist/Clerk without being subjected to Typing Test.
(3.) ON the other hand Standing Counsel has argued that for promotion on Class III post from Group IV post, a candidate is required to have knowledge of Typing and the qualifi­cation of necessary test speed is compulsory. The necessary requirement for being pro­moted on the post of Clerk is typing speed 25 words per minute in Hindi, which the peti­tioner does not possess. Therefore, the im­pugned order is fully justified and legal.;