J.C.S.Rawat, J. - (1.) THIS is a Special Appeal against the judgment and order dated 01-10-2004 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 214 (S/S) of 2002 whereby the writ petition of the writ petitioner Dhirendra Singh Rawat was allowed and quashed the order dated 03-04-1995 and 29-08-1995 passed by the Commissioner Garhwal Division.
(2.) THE petitioner/respondent No. 5 Dhirendra Singh Rawat filed a writ peti tion before the learned Single judge for the following reliefs : "(A) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 3-4-1995 (Annexure 3) passed by the Divi sional Commissioner-respondent No: 3. (B) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 29-08-1995 passed by the Divisional Commis sioner, Garhwal Division respond ent No.3, as communicated by the District Magistrate vide 7iis order dated 4-10-1995 (Annexure-5A). (C) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus com manding the respondents No. 2- Board of Revenue to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 12-4-1995 (Annexure-5A) pending before it. (D) Issue any other writ, order or di rection which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (E) Award cost to the petitioner." It is the admitted case of the par ties that the writ petitioner Dhirendra Singh Rawat and the appellant Govind Ram have been working as Lekhpals in the Garhwal Division, Pauri. That a selection committee was constituted for the promo tion of Assistant Registrar Kanoongo in the year 1992 in which three names namely Ashok Kumar, Bharat Mohan Singh and Govind Ram-appellant were se lected by the selection, committee and rec ommended for being promoted as Assistant Registrar Kanoongo. The writ petitioner Dhirendra Singh Rawat did not appear be fore the selection committee in the year 1992 hence he was not selected in that year. According to the select list for the year 1992, Ashok Kumar whose name was at serial No. 1 and Bharat Mohan Singh whose name was at serial No. 2 were given promotion vide order dated 18-08-2003 to the post of Assistant Registrar Kanoongo. Since the name of the appellant was at serial No. 3, hence he was placed in the waiting list. A fresh selection list for the year 1994 to the post of Assistant Regis trar Kanoongo was prepared in accord ance with Rule 8 of U.P Avar Rjaasva Lipik (Registrar Kanoongo and Sahayak Registrar Kanoongo) Sewa Niyamawali, 1958 (hereinafter referred as 1958 Rules) and the writ petitioner Bharat Singh Rawat was selected at serial No. 1 in gen eral category by the duly constituted se lection Committee. The appellant Govind Ram has not applied afresh before the se lection committee and the name of the writ petitioner and others were forwarded by the S.D.M. alongwith their recommen dation for the promotion of Assistant Registrar Kanoongo. Consequently, the writ petitioner Bharat Singh Rawat was given appointment by promotion on 04-06-1994. The appellant Govind Ram feel ing aggrieved by the said promotion of the writ petitioner filed representation claim ing his promotion on the post of Assist ant Registrar Kanoongo. The representa tion of the appellant was allowed on 03-04-1995 by the Commissioner Garhwal Division. Feeling aggrieved by this, a re view application preferred by the writ pe titioner Dhirendra Singh Rawat before the Commissioner and the same was rejected on 29-08-1985 and as such, the writ petitioner- Dhirendra Singh Rawat was re verted as Lekhpal. Feeling aggrieved by the orders 03-04-1995 and 29-08- 1985 of the Commissioner Garhwal Division, the writ petitioner Dhirendra Singh Rawat preferred a writ petition before the learned Single Judge. The writ petitioner Dhirendra Singh Rawat alleged that the order of the Com missioner setting aside his appointment was illegal and against the rules. The re spondents in its counter affidavit alleged that the selection committee held in the year 1992 recommended three names of Lekhpal for promotion as Assistant Reg istrar including the appellant. Among the three recommended persons, two were appointed as Assistant Registrar Kanoongo whereas the appellant being on waiting list number 3 was to be promoted wherever any vacancy would occur. The Collector instead of appointing the appel lant on the post of Assistant Registrar from the waiting list, illegally prepared a fresh list for the promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar Kanoongo and the writ petitioner- Dhirendra Singh Rawat was promoted from the post of Lekhpal to As sistant Registrar Kanoongo. The list pre pared in the year 1992 in which the name of the writ petitioner was kept in waiting list number 3 was valid for a period of three years.
(3.) THE learned Single Judge, while holding that the life of the select list was one year prepared in the year 1992 and the appointment of the writ petitioner was in accordance with the rules quashed and set aside the orders dated 03-04-1995 and 29-08-1995 passed by the Commissioner. The main controversy relates to the point as to whether the persons who were selected in the year 1992 and were kept in waiting list have a right of being pro moted after one year when a fresh selec tion has taken place or the selection list prepared in the year 1992 shall remain operative for three years as alleged by the appellant.;