- (1.) This is a glaring illustration of the audacity of the respondents-officers of Public Works Department going to the extent of even filing false affidavits before this Court and attempting to misrepresent and mislead this Court. The observations would stand demonstrated from the following facts borne out from the record.
(2.) Petitioner claims to have obtained a driving license, valid for Motor Car and Light Motor Vehicle, from licensing authority, Motor Vehicle Department, Kanpur on 7.6.1984 which was renewed thereafter from time to time. He was engaged as Cleaner in the year 1990 and ultimately was regularized on the said post of Cleaner by order dated 17.7.2007 passed by Executive Engineer, Provincial Division, P.W.D. Fatehgarh, copy whereof is on record as Annexure 9 to the writ petition. Respondents proceeded to promote some daily wage Cleaners as Driver by order dated 27.6.2007 whereagainst petitioner made a representation on 29.6.2007 that he should also be considered for promotion to the post of Driver when his juniors have been promoted and then came to this Court in Writ Petition No. 54100 of 2007, which was disposed of finally vide judgment dated 14.2.2011 with the following order: "The grievance of the petitioner is that he is senior working as a daily wage Cleaner to respondents 5, 6 and 7 but without considering him for promotion though on daily wage basis as Driver, his juniors have been promoted. By means of supplementary affidavit he has also filed a copy of representation dated 29th June, 2007 ventilating his grievance regarding his non consideration for promotion to the post of Driver while his juniors have been promoted. In the counter affidavit, respondents have not given any specific reason for not considering the petitioner for promotion to the post of Driver except of saying that order of promotion dated 27th June, 2007 promoting respondents No.5 to 7 is in accordance with law. In my view, let this matter be examined by higher authority in the Department, who shall pass a speaking order considering grievance of the petitioner and shall also examine validity of promotion of respondents No.5 to 7 ignoring claim of the petitioner. In the circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, I dispose of this writ petition permitting the petitioner to make suitable representation before respondent No.3 within a month from today and in case such representation is made alongwith certified copy of this order to the aforesaid authority, the same shall be considered and respondent No.3 shall pass a speaking order after giving due opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties within two months thereafter. The impugned order of promotion of respondents No.5 to 7 shall abide by such order passed by respondent No.3. With the aforesaid observation/direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. "
(3.) It appears that pursuant thereto, the Superintending Engineer, Etawah Circle, Public Works Department, Etawah passed order dated 25.7.2011 rejecting petitioner's representation seeking promotion on the post of Driver on the ground that in the seniority list received from the Office of Engineer-in-Chief with respect to Group "C" employees, name of petitioner was not shown in the list of Cleaners, and, secondly that petitioner's initial appointment was on the post of Helper and there is no departmental rule for promoting Helper to the post of Driver. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the aforesaid order as also the direction issued by Chief Engineer by letter dated 15.6.2007 directing Superintending Engineer concerned to consider only those persons whose names are mentioned in the appended list at Sl. No. 236 to 265 working as Cleaner for promotion to the post of Driver. Petitioner has also challenged the order dated 27.6.2007 whereby respondents 6, 7 and 8 were promoted as Driver from the post of Cleaner.;