- (1.) BARKAT Ali Zaidi, J. The petitioners are employed in Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as Greater Noida) and petitioner Nos. 1 to 14 belong to Group-B Cadre, whose next promotion will be in Group-A cadre and petitioner Nos. 15 and 16 belong to Group-C cadre, whose next promotion will be in Group-B.
(2.) THE respondent Nos. 3 to 5 are on deputation with the Greater Noida Authority and the prayer of the petitioners is for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 not to absorb them on deputation and make appointments by promotion to the posts falling vacant in Group-A and B. THE immediate cause of action arose because the respondent No. 2 vide letter dated 6-7-2005 recommended the absorption of the services of respondent No. 3, who is posted on the post of Senior Manager, Engineering in the Greater Noida Authority and is on deputation from the U. P. Central Authorities Services. Heard Ms. Rachna Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Sri Uma Nath Pandey, S. K. Srivastava, Pradeep Kumar and Sri U. K. Saxena for the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and learned standing Counsel for the State. The contention of the petitioners is that under the Rules, the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 cannot be absorbed because they are on deputation. As regards the respondent No. 3, it has been mentioned hereunder in the petition : "the respondent No. 3 working as Assistant Engineer in U. P. Centralised Development Authority Services joined the Authority on 22-6-2002 on deputation as Senior Manager, which is two post higher as per cadre structure of the authority. The said deputation was in violation of Government Order dated 31-3- 1994. His period of deputation ended on 24-10-2003 when he was repatriated to his parent Department and was directed to be relieved by an order dated 24-10-2003 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition)". "surprisingly, respondent No. 3 by manipulations with the officers of the State Government using political influence, managed cancellation of his relieving order when an order, to cancel the order dated 24-10-2003 was issued on 28-10- 2003 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition)". "after cancellation of his relieving order, he remained on deputation and completed the maximum period of 3 years on 18-5- 2005". "again to the surprise of everyone in the Department, his deputation was further extended by 2 years w. e. f 18-5-2005 vide a letter dated 27-6-2005 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition)", in violation of the Government Order dated 1-6-2002. " "before completion of his 3 years' period on deputation, the respondent no 3 vide a letter dated 12-5- 2005, submitted an application for permanent absorption/merger in the authority (Annexure-7 to the writ petition ). " "the petitioners have learnt that efforts are going on for absorption of persons on deputation permanently in the cadre, thereby depriving those who are entitled to promotion from their right of promotion. '
(3.) AGAINST the proposed absorption of respondent Nos. 3 to 5, a representation was submitted to the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Greater Noida Authority that they should not be absorbed in the Greater Noida Authority because it will adversely affect the promotional chances of the petitioners. As mentioned in paragraph No. 5 of the writ petition, the Greater Noida Authority framed its own Regulations under Section 90 of U. P. Industrial Area Development Act,1976, namely Greater Noida Industrial Development Authorities Service Regulations, 1993. It has further been clarified in the petition that the service conditions including appointments and promotions of the employees of Greater Noida Authority are governed by these statutory Rules.;