- (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel. The claim made by the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Class-IV employee in the institution and was confirmed subsequently. There is only one sanctioned post of clerk in the institution and Sri G.S. Tomar who was working on the said post, retired on 31.7.2009. The petitioner, who is at serial No. 4 in the order of seniority of Class-IV employees, as all the three candidates who are senior to the petitioner are not eligible to be promoted on the said post, therefore, the petitioner is the only candidate to be considered and promoted on the said post. To that effect the petitioner has already submitted an application before respondent No. 4 but no action has been taken and subsequent reminders have also been submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner has also submitted a representation to respondent No. 2, District Inspector of Schools to that effect, but no action has been taken by the Committee of Management as well as by District Inspector of Schools.
(2.) The petitioner has also relied upon a judgment in Munna Lal v. Devendra Bahadur Singh Chandel and others, 2007 69 AllLR 791. Taking support of the aforesaid judgment learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that being a single post, it can only be filled up by promotion and it cannot be filled up by direct recruitment of the eligible candidates, available in the institution working in Class-IV.
(3.) After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record as up till date no decision has been taken by the authority below, therefore, it will be in the interest of justice that the respondents may be directed to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders specifically in accordance with law after considering the Division Bench judgment of this Court within a specific period.;