- (1.) PALOK Basu, J. The questions involved in the first writ petition filed by Sri K. P. Tripathi and others is as to whether the direction contained in the memorandum dated 13-3-1995 (Annexure 8-A) as issued by the Chairman, State Electricity Board is valid to the extent it involves promotion of Sche duled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Executive Engineers to the post of Superin tending Engineers on determined reserved quota, and whether the reservations if valid, could be increased by subsequent order of the State Government and adopted by the Board for the promotional posts of Superintending Engineers ? The question in issue in the other two writ petitions do not relate to promo tional post but challenge the power of the U. P. State Electricity Board (for short the Board) to pass orders of confirmation in favour of the candidates in the Assistant Engineers belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to the extent the petitioner stand affected. As agreed by the learned counsel for the parties all the three writ petitions have been heard together because the matter has assumed importance inasmuch as some of the interim orders passed in the later two writ petitions have stopped further promotions of all the candidates eligible for it whether belonging to general category or to the category of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Counter-affidavit and rejoinder affidavits as well as supplementary affidavits by all the parties have been filed in the later two writ petitions but so far as first writ petition is concerned a counter-affidavit and supplementary affidavit by one of the opposite parties, namely Sri Balram Verma, have initially been filed. It may be mentioned that notice on behalf of the Board was accepted by Sri Sashi Nandan, Advocate on 20-3-1995. At the time of arguments, the Board has been represented by Shri S. M, A. Kazmi in the first writ petition as learned Standing Counsel for the Board while in the other two by Shri S. P. Mehrotra, Subsequently however, a counter-affidavit on behalf of the Board has also been filed to which a rejoinder affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the peti tioners in the first writ petition. Sri Rakesh Dwivedi, assisted by Sri Sailendra, has appeared on behalf of the petitioners in all the petitions while Sri Sudhir Chandra, Sri A. K. Yadav, Sri Subhash Budhwar have argued the case on behalf of private respondents in all the three writ petitions. As agreed by the learned counsel for the parties all the three writ petitions are being disposed of finally at this stage.
(2.) COMING to the facts involved in the first writ petition it may be stated here that origin of the controversy in this case has long history to narrate. A Division Bench of the Lucknow Bench of this Court passed final orders in the two writ petition (Writ Petition No. 47 of 1984, B. P. Kuril v. Board and Writ Petition No 1003 of 1985, U. P. Rajya Vidyut Parishad (SC, ST) Karmchari Kalyan Sanzh v. Board, and by its judgment and order dated 5-3-1987 partly allowed the petitions. The relevant portion of the judgment should be quoted here :- "in view of the above the writ petition are partly allowed and a writ of mandamus is issued commanding the Board and its authorities to consider the claim of executive engineers belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who fulfil the eligibility qualification for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer in accordance with law and the observations made hereinabove. It is specifically directed that the suitability and merit of the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, including petitioner B. P. Kureel, shall be judged by comparing the same with Executive Engineers belonging to the general category. The costs in the two petitions shall be easy. " It appears that some of the Engineers belonging to the general cate gory felt aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment. They and some others filed review petition which came to be numbered as Review Petition No. 75 (w) of 1987, Review Petition No. 76 (w) of 1987 and Review Petition No. 117 of 1987. In the first two review petitions the U. P. State Electricity Board was the applicant while in the third Sundar Lal and some other candidates of the general category were the applicants in which U. P. Rajya Yidyut Parishad (SC, ST) Karmchari Kalyan Sangh and others were opposite parties. It would have been better to go into respective cases pleaded by all concerned claiming review of the said judgment, but since the matter has later on engaged the attention of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the arguments advanced in the review petitions are omitted. Suffice it to say that the opera tive portion of the judgment in the review applications reads as under :- "in view of the above the review applications are allowed and the judgment and order dated 5th March, 1987 rendered in Writ Petition Nos. 47 of 1984 and 1003 of 1985 is hereby set aside. That judgment will stand substituted by the present judgment whereby we partly allow the writ petitions and issue a writ of mandamus to the U. P. Electricity Board and its authorities and hereby command that they will consider the claim of Executive Engineers belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who possess the qualifications prescribed in Rule 3 of the U. P. State Electricity Board Services of Engineers Regulations, 1970 for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer, if they fall in the zone of consideration, in accordance with law and the obser vations made hereinabove. The cost in the review petitions and in the writ petition shall be easy.
(3.) CIVIL Appeal No. 4026 of 1988 was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by U. P. Rajya Vidyut Parishad (SC, ST) Karmachari Kalyan Sangh. It appears that on other writ petition as well as one other S. L. P. was connected with the same. The aforesaid special appeal has been disposed by their Lord ship's of the Supreme Court finally on 23-11-1994. Some of the observations in the said judgment have binding effect and both the parties have sought interpretation of the same in one way or the other calling upon this court to indicate its opinion as to the effect of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment. The relevant portion in the aforesaid judgment of the apex court is as under :- "we concluded the argument in this case on November 16,1994 passed following order : "we have concluded hearing argument. We are prima facie in agreement with. the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that there has to be separate zone for consideration so far as SC, ST candidates are concerned. Clubbing Sche duled Castes with general category in the same zone of consideration would defeat the very purpose of reservations. Mr. B. Sen, learned senior counsel, appearing for the Board, stated that he would like to place the matter before the Board and seek further instruction from the Board. . . . . . . . " Thereafter, Their Lordships have quoted paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 from the affidavit of one Mr. A. M. Rawal on behalf of State Electricity Board which was filed before the Supreme Court on 22-11-1994. Then Their Lord ships have made the following observations :- "in view of the averment made in the affidavit quoted above, it is not necessary for us to go into various questions canvassed before us as they have been substantially met by the Board. In view of the stand taken by the Board in its aforesaid affidavit, the judgment of the High Court has become redundant and it shall not be operative. The appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs. In view of the order passed in O. A. No. 4078 of 1988 the writ petition and Special Leave Petition are disposed of. ";