Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel, J. - (1.) BY means of the present writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought a direction to the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to promote the petitioner as Assistant Accountant in the Office of Finance and Accounts Officer, Basic Shiksha Mainpuri from 2003 with payment of regular salary in the promotional grade.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a clerk on 21.9.1981 in the office of Shiksha Adhikshak, Nagar Kshetra, Mainpuri. The Finance & Accounts Officer is the Appointing Authority of the Junior Accounts Clerk. He was confirmed as a Junior Accounts Clerk w.e.f. 1.4.1994 by order dated 19.9.1996. The promotion of the Assistant Clerk is to the post of Assistant Accountant. The post of Assistant Accountant is a promotional post. The petitioner states that in the office of the Finance & Accounts Officer, Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Mainpuri, there were three sanctioned posts of junior accounts clerks. The two other posts are lying vacant. A detailed list of the posts and the employees working in the office of Finance & Accounts Officer has been filed as annexure -4 to the writ petition. The petitioner made several representations for his promotion on the post of Assistant Accountant, but his representations have not been entertained by the authorities concerned. The petitioner relies on a Government Order dated 2.12.2000, wherein, it is provided that those employees, who have completed 14 years of the satisfactory service, shall be entitled to the promotional grade also. The petitioner has completed more than 14 years of satisfactory service, however, the promotional grade has not yet been sanctioned to him in terms of Government Order dated 2.12.2000. Learned counsel for the petitioner further stated that he has an unblemished service record. This fact has not been denied in the counter affidavit. However, it is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner's appointment was on the post of clerk -cum - typist. It is to be noted that, when the petitioner was initially appointed, he was not allotted his designation by mistake and in his appointment letter Junior Accounts Clerk was mentioned. It was corrected in subsequent letter dated 30.3.199, annexure -2 to the writ petition. In paragraph -3 of the writ petition, the aforesaid fact has been stated. However, in paragraph no. 4 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 3, it has not been denied that the said letter was not issued. It is not the case of respondents that the said letter is a fabricated or manufactured. The respondent no. 3 has termed the said letter illegal. In my judgment, it is not open to respondent to treat an order illegal, unless it is cancelled/withdrawn by competent authority.
(3.) THE petitioner has also filed his confirmation letter dated 19.5.1996 issued by his Appointing Authority. The petitioner has made several representations but none of his representations have been considered. Learned counsel for the the petitioner contended that inspite of the fact that petitioner has unblemished more than 14 years service record, the respondents have not considered his promotion without any justifiable reason.;