UMESH GAUTAM Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2008-9-112
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on September 08,2008

UMESH GAUTAM Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) HEARD Shri Amrish Singh holding brief of Shri Vijay Gautam for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appears for respondents.
(2.) THE petitioners were selected as Fire Station Second Officers in the year 1993/98 by direct recruitment. Among these selected candidates 94 were called for training at State Fire Training College, Unnaoon8. 12. 1997. By an order of the Deputy Inspector General, Fire Services, Headquarters Lucknow dated 2. 2. 1998, eight candidates were kept in the waiting list. THE petitioners joined on 12. 2. 1998. Two vacancies were filled from the waiting list as one candidate from general category and one from other backward class category left the training. THE peti tioners 1 and 2 were allocated the State of Uttaranchal in the year 2002. A tentative seniority list was issued on 24. 4. 2004 showing the names of the petitioners at serial No. 99 and 97 respectively. In this seniority list the peti tioners' batch was shown to have started from SI. No. 15 to SI. No. 105. The petitioners filed objections to their placement in the seniority list on the ground that they should be put just below the general category candidates and above the O. B. C. and SC/st candidates. The petitioners also objected that their seniority should not be fixed as provided in the Uttar Pradesh Government Servants Seniority Rules, 1991 (in short the Rules of 1991 ). The objections were rejected.
(3.) THE petitioners alongwith Shri Vijay Prakash Tripathi as applicant No. 3 filed a Claim Petition No. 171/2006 in the State Public Services Tribunal. After exchange of a lavits, the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition holding that the seniority amongst the persons selected had to be determined in accordance with Rule 19 of the United Provinces Fire Services (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1945 (in short the Rules of 1945 ). The short question that calls for consideration in this case is whether the seniority of the petitioners is to be determined in accordance with the Rules of 1945 or in accordance with the Rules of 1991.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.