- (1.) P. C. Verma, J. The pe titioner appeared for the Combined Civil Services Examination, 1998 conducted by the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission. His Roll number was 130504. His date of birth was 25-07- 1974. His educational qualification was a post-graduate in Arts. Page 2 of Annexure 4 shows the post preferred by the petitioner. They are (1) Deputy Col lector, (2) Deputy Superintendent of Po lice, (3) Asstt. Regional Transport Of ficer, (4) Trade Tax Officer, (5) Addi tional District Development Officer (So cial Welfare), (6) Associate District In spector of Schools / District Basic Edu cation Officer i. e. B. S. A. (Basic Shiksha Adhikari) / other equivalent Administra tive Post in the Hill cadre. There are other posts also preferred by the peti tioner, but they are not mentioned as they are not relevant for the purpose of this case.
(2.) THE result of the examination was published on 23-11-1998. Annexure R. A. 2 produced alongwith the rejoinder affidavit shows that the petitioner's Roll No. 130504 was included among the candidates selected for the executive group. THEre are two executive groups mentioned and the petitioner is included in the second executive group. THE other groups mentioned in the Annexure R. A. 2 are Vanijya (commerce) group and Vishesh Bharti (special recruitment) group. In the result published in Dainik Jagran on 25-12-1998 as seen from Annexure R. A. 2, the petitioner's Roll Number was included along 187 candi dates selected. Annexure 5 is copy of the result published in the same news paper, in which the roll number and the name of the petitioner are shown under the heading posts Basic Shiksha Adhikari (H ). It means that the peti tioner was selected / allotted for the post of Basic Shiksha Adhikari (Hill cadre ). As per Annexure P-6 order dated 2/- 09-1999, the petitioner was appointed as Principal, G. I. C. Dangi (Pauri Garhwal ). Later by Annexure P-8 order dated 2/- 12-1999, Annexure P-6 order was modi fied to the extent of posting the petitioner as Principal, Government Interme diate College, Mussoorie. Since then, the petitioner has been working as Prin cipal, Government Inter College, Mussoorie, The petitioner filed writ petition no. 445 of 2003 praying for a direction to the State of Uttaranchal to prepare a tentative seniority list of RC. S. Execu tive Branch Officers belonging to 1998 batch. The said writ petition was dis posed of vide Annexure 1 judgment dated 26-08-2003 observing that the writ petition is premature. However, it was made clear that the said judgment will not come in the way of the petitioner moving this Court again if the Govern ment does not move in time after peti tioner makes a representation. In the light of Annexure P-l judgment, the petitioner submitted Annexure P-2 rep resentation dated 05-09-2003. When there was no response from the respond ent, he filed the present writ petition praying for a direction to the respond ent to prepare a tentative seniority list of the officers belonging to 1998 batch of P. C. S. Executive Branch Officers in dicating the petitioner's seniority inter se his batch mates, followed by prepare of the final seniority list, within a peremp tory time period to be fixed by the Court. While admitting the writ petition on 28-11-2003, this Court directed the respondent to take decision on the preparation of tentative seniority list within three weeks. However, no tenta tive seniority list was prepared within the time stipulated by the Court. Hence, the petitioner filed Civil Contempt Petition No. 7370 of 2004. Thereupon, a tenta tive seniority list of Uttaranchal Educa tional Service (General Education Cadre) was prepared and produced alongwith the counter affidavit in the contempt case. The petitioner's name is included in the said list at serial no. 249. The pe titioner's name is shown as Principal, Government Inter College, Mussoorie. The grievance of the petitioner is that instead of preparing seniority list of P. C. S. (Executive Branch) Officers of 1998 batch and including him in the said seniority list, the respondent has prepared the seniority list of U. P. Edu cation Services (General Education Cadre) officers and included him in that list. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to be treated as a member of the U. P. Civil Service (Executive Branch ). According to the respondent, the peti tioner was not selected for the U. P Civil Services (Executive Branch) and he was selected only for the. U. P Educational (General Education Cadre) Service. In support of the stand of the respondent, the learned Standing Counsel pointed out that in Annexure P- 5, the petitioner was shown among candidates selected for the post of Basic Shiksha Adhikari (Hill cadre;; that he was appointed as Principal, G. I. C. Dangi and later as Principal G. I. C. Mussoorie. It is pointed out that the post of Basic Shiksha Adhikari and Principal, Government In ter College are inter- changeable posts. Learned Standing Counsel also invited our attention to Rule 5 of the U. P Edu cational (General Education Cadre) Service Rules, 1992 (Annexure P-7), ac cording to which, 50% of the posts of Basic Shiksha Adhikaris are to be filled up by direct recruitment by combined Civil Services Examination to be con ducted by the Public Service Commis sion. He also pointed out that in the U. P. Civil Service (Executive Branch) Rules, 1982 (Annexure P-9), the posts of Ba sic Shiksha Adhikari is not included. It is contended that having been selected for appointment as Basic Shiksha Adhikari and having accepted without protest appointment as Principal Gov ernment Inter College, it is not open to the petitioner to contend that he should be treated as a member of the U. P. Civil Services (Executive Branch ).
(3.) AT the same time, learned coun sel for the petitioner pointed out that the essential qualifications for the posts of Principal, Government Inter College are (1) post graduate degree, (2) L. T. di ploma / B. T. / B. Ed. , (3) Experience mentioned in Rule 8 of the U. P. Educa tional (General Education Cadre) Serv ice Rules. He points out that the peti tioner is a mere postgraduate and he did not have any L. T. diploma or B. T. or B. Ed, and required experience and hence he could not have been appointed to the post of Principal, Government Inter College. Learned counsel also points out that according to Rule 10 of the U. P. Educational (General Education Cadre) Service Rules, the minimum age required for the post of Principal is thirty years and the petitioner had not complete s the age of thirty years when he was ap pointed as Principal. For that reason also, he was not eligible to be appointed as Principal. In the above circumstances, the basic issue that arises in the writ peti tion is whether the petitioner was se lected for appointment to the U. P. Civil Services (Executive Branch) or to the Uttaranchal Educational Service (Gen eral Service Cadre ).;