l';-~\'.Ss^- !y; HIGH COURT OF CHHATT'ISGARH : BILASPUR Petitioner Resoondents 1. 2. 4. Writ Petition No. 209 of 2005 S. Bharti, S/o G. R. Bharti, aged about 38 years, Sub Engiaeer, posted hi the O/o the Asst. Enguieer (Electrical Safetyj and Asst. Electrical Inspector Govt. ofC.G. Sub Division Bilaspur, Dist. BUaspur (C.G.) State of Chliattisgarh., Throiigh the Secretaiy, Energy Department, Man.tralaya, Raipui', Dist. Raipur (C.G.) The Secretan', General Administration Departinent, Maiitralaya, Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) The Secretar^r General, AdniiaistratioE. Departinent, VaUabh Bliawau, Maugralaya Bhopal, Dist. Bhopal (M.P.) C. G. Public Service Coinniission, through the Secretary, Sbauker Nagar, Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. (SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotn J.) Shri PrafuU Bharat, Advocate for the petitioiier. Ms Sunita Jain, Paael Lawyer for fhe i^spondents No. 1 & 2. Shri Abliishek Sinlia, Advocate for fhe respondent No.4. (Passed on fhis 22nd day ofJune, 2009) 1. In fbis niatter, the petitioner is seekiag a dircction to ainend fhe service rules to impleinent fhe iasta-uctions issued by fhe General Adininistration Departm.ent • dated 9.9.1998 (Aiiaexure P/3), whereby fhe quota for appoiritinent by direct i-ecruituient in regard to proiaotion froai diploiaa holder Sub Eugiaeers and degree holder Sub Engrueers has been fixed. Further, fhe petitioner seeks qziashiag of the advertisem.ent dated 1.12.2004, published on 8.12.2004 (Annexure P/11), which was based on the existiiig Rules, 2, The petitioner was workiiig as Sub Engiaeer m. the Energy Departiaent of fhe State Goverament. Leained counsel appearm; ,^wy?sl*. •^ -^, SS-, 1 "••'-^•^. is •^ ^^ •ft' 3B 3. for ftie petitioner subinits that fhe quota for proinotion ia case of diplosaa holder Sub Enguieers should be 50% as per flie cit-cular dated 9.9.1998 (Aiuiexure P/3), issued by tlie General Administration Department. The circular issued by fhe General Adiiiirustration Departaient or aay otber departiuent of the State Govemiaent caiuiot overrides fhe statutory provisions. In fhe present case fhe Service Rules, niade in exercise of the powers under Article 309 of fhe Constitution of India, does not provide for the above stated ratio for appointment on tlie post of Assistaut Engiaeers by direct recruitinents or by proinotion. Thus, fhe circular dated 9.9.1998 caiinot have any saiictitv- or legaUty untU and urdess the sarue is iucorporated ia the Riiles i.e. Madhya Pradesh Public Worlcs Engm.eerm.g (Gazetted) Service Rules, 1998. It is for fhe govemment to fraiue fhe Rules, goveming service conditions of einplovees. It is a to-ite law fhat no Court caa direct the ;oveminent or legislature to frame rules ia accordaace with tlie lueiuo issued by aiiy of the Govt. departnients. In view of tlie foregoiag, ftie writ petitiou is devoid of inerit. Secondly, the. petitioner has sought for quashing of ftie advertiseiuent dated 1.12.2004 (Annexure P/11) which has already been acted upon, selection has been niade and consequent thereupon, flie appoiatinent has been niade. On fhis count the petition has become infructuous. In view of the foregoing, fhe writ petil^on is disintesed. No order asto costs. Thala.u-- Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge