- (1.) A. B. Srivastava, J. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of an order dated 27-6-1992 Annexure-SA. 1 of Director Panchayat Raj U. P. transferring the respondent No. 4 Sarjoo Prasad Dubey from the post of Dis trict Panchayat Raj Adhikan Banda to Farukkhabad.
(2.) THE petitioner claims that he was appointed Additional Development Officer (Panchayat) on 25-2- 1985 at Faruk khabad, later he was transferred to District Kanpur where he was confirmed on 8-4-1987 and thereafter transferred to Kan-nauj in District Farukkhabad in 1990 on the same post. Meanwhile by an order dated 14-12-90 of the Director of Panchayat Raj, 237 persons including the respondent No. 4 appointed to the post of Additional Development Officer (Panchayat) and by an order dated 17-12-1990 all these were confirmed. THE said confirmation was challenged in writ peti tion No. 1716 of 1991 (Balram Sharma v. State of U. P.) and by an order dated 12-1-1991, the operation of the two orders was stayed. Meanwhile the then District Panchayat Raj Officer Farukkhabad having been suspended by an order dated 27-4-1992, the petitioner was appointed to the said post in a casual vacancy and joined the said post. Later by an order dated 12-5-1992 he was given a regular appointment as District Panchayat Raj Officer in the scale of Rs. 2000-3500 vide Annexure-7. Despite the said promotion and in viola tion of the interim order of this Court, the Director transferred the respondent No. 4, an Additional Development Officer, to the post of District Panchayat Raj Officer Farukkhabad and in this way the petitioner is illegally sought to be ousted from the post of District Panchayat Raj Officer and replaced by a person junior to him. It has been contended on behalf of the State, and it is also apparent from the record of Writ Petition No. 1716 of 1991 (supra) that the said petition itself was dismissed by Division Bench of this Court and the interim order vacated. Thus the basis for the petitioner's contention that the respondent No. 4, and or for that mat ter others mentioned in Annexures-1 and 2 remained unapproved and unconfirmed as Additional Development Officers, has ceased to exist. The next contention about the petitioner having been promoted in due course to the post of Panchayat Raj Officer Farukkhabad is also without substance. On his own showing the petitioner was asked to look after the functions of the District Panchayat Raj Officer consequent to the suspension of the incumbent. The vital powers as to finance were yet to be exercised by the Chief Development Of ficer. As far as alleged promotion by means of order dated 12-5-1992 Annexure-7 is con cerned, it is by an order of Collector Farukkhabad. No rules have been cited, nor al leged to be in existence, authorising the Col lector to exercise the powers of appointing authority in respect of Gazetted post of Dis trict Panchayat Raj Officer in the estab lishment of Director of Panchayats U. P. Even otherwise Annexure-7 itself says that the promotion was purely temporary and the petitioner was liable to reversion to his parent post anytime without notice. A per son duly regularised and confirmed by or ders dated 14-12-1990 and 17-12-1990 and the writ challenging the same having been dismissed, transfer of respondent No. 4 to man the post of District Panchayat Raj Officer Farukkhabad, can in no way be said to be illegal or unsustainable.
(3.) THE petitioner has not made out any case worth interference by this Court. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. The interim order dated 12-10-1992 is recalled.;