S.Rafat Alam, Sudhir Agarwal - (1.) WHETHER Lab Assistant is eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer under U. P. State Electricity Board (Subordinate Electrical and Mechanical Engineering Service) Regulations, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as Regulation of 1972) is the short question raised in these special appeals.
(2.) ARUN Kumar Dubey, petitioner respondent No. 1 was appointed as Lab Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 1100-1575 vide order dated 6.4.1988 and was posted at Anpara Thermal Project where joined on 8.4.1988. Sri Satya Narain Vishwakarma, petitioner respondent No. 2 was appointed as Lab Assistant vide order dated 15.12.1995 in the pay scale of Rs. 1100-1575 and was posted at Anpara Thermal Project where he joined on 18.12.1995. Sri Amresh Das petitioner respondent No. 3 was appointed as Lab Assistant vide order dated 16.12.1995 in the pay scale of Rs. 1100-1575 and he was also posted at Anpara Thermal Project on 27.1.1996. The petitioners-respondents, after division of the U. P. State Electricity Board (in short 'Board') in three independent bodies namely, U. P. Power Corporation Limited, U. P. Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited and U. P. Jal Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, are working under the U. P. Rajya Utpadan Nigam Limited appellant No. 1. It appears that on 14.11.2003 a requisition was published by the Electricity Service Commission, a centralized body, for recruitments in all the aforesaid three bodies, inviting applications from the employees belonging to operating cadre for consideration for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (ordinary cadre). The qualifications required to be possessed by such employees, as published in the aforesaid advertisement may be reproduced as under : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... The Electricity Service Commission in the aforesaid requisition, notified 504 vacancies of Junior Engineer in U. P. Power Corporation Limited (ordinary cadre), which included 349 vacancies in U. P. Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited. All the petitioners respondents applied claiming to possess the requisite qualification under clause A (1) of the advertisement, i.e., operating cadre employees. However, the Electricity Service Commission vide its letter dated 23.6.2004 rejected the application of the petitioner respondents on the following ground : "Parichalikiya Varg Ke Karamchari Na Hone Par Athva Kushal Na Hote Par Nirast."
(3.) THE petitioners-respondents sent representations to the Electricity Service Commission stating that they fulfilled the qualification prescribed under clause A (1) of the advertisement and belonged to operating cadre employees, hence rejection of their candidature is contrary to the rules. However, when the appellant No. 2 did not communicate any decision, the petitioners-respondents approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 27561 of 2004 wherein the following interim order was passed on 23.7.2004 : "Sri A. K. Mehrotra has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 3 whereas Shri R. D. Khare has accepted notice on behalf of respondent No. 3. THEy pray for and are granted 3 weeks and no more time to file counter-affidavit. Rejoinder-affidavit, if any may be filed within 2 weeks thereafter. List immediately after expiry of the said period. THE contention of the petitioners is that they are eligible for appearing in the examination schedule to be held on 25.7.2004 but their application forms have been wrongly rejected on the ground that they are not eligible employees of operating cadres. It appears from Annexures-2, 3 and 6 appended to the writ petition that the petitioners are eligible and they belong to operating cadres. For the reasons stated above, the petitioners shall be permitted to appear in the examination scheduled to be held on 25.7.2004 subject to the decision of the writ petition. Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to the petitioners today, if they apply for the same." (Emphasis added) In pursuance to the aforesaid order the petitioner respondents appeared in the examination held on 25.7.2004 but their result was not declared although the result of other candidates was declared on 15.12.2005. The appellants also failed to file any counter-affidavit and in the circumstances, this Court, passed following order on 16.9.2004 in the aforesaid writ petition : "In spite of time being granted on 23.7.2004 to file C.A. within three weeks no C.A. has been filed as yet. Counsel for the petitioner stated that the result of all the other candidates has been declared but due to the pendency of writ petition the result of the petitioner is not being declared but due to the pendency of writ petition the respondents are going to hold interview. In the aforesaid circumstances it is provided that the result of the petitioners would be declared and if the petitioners are eligible they shall be permitted to appear in the interview provisionally. In the meantime counter-affidavit may be filed within three weeks. Two weeks thereafter are granted for filing R.A. List this case after expiry of the aforesaid period." (Emphasis added) ;