HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL (Court’s order whether the case is or not approved for reporting) Chapter VIII, Rule 32(2) (b) Description of the case Writ Petition No. 1322 of 2005 Laxman Singh Vs D.M. Tehri Garhwal. Approved for reporting _______________________ Not Approved for Reporting Date of decision: 21-9-2005 Initials of Judge IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1322 (S/S) OF 2005 Laxman Singh, son of late Sri Avtar Singh @ Chandan Singh, R/o Village Daur, Patti Dhamandasyun, Tehri Garhwal …..……….Petitioner Versus 1. The District Magistrate, Tehri Garhawl. 2. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Narendra Nagar,District Tehri Garhwal …….……Respondents 21.09.2005 Sri Chetan Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Kailash Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri Chetan Joshi, leaned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kailash Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel and both the parties have agreed that let the matter be finally disposed of By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to issue appointment letter in favour of the petitioner on the basis of the recommendation made by the Selection Committee. Briefly stated, according to the case of the petitioner, the State of U.P. has framed Group ‘D’ Employees Service Rules, 1985 regarding recruitment of Group-D post. Rule 16 of the aforesaid Rule provides the constitution of Selection Committee. The same are quoted below:- “[16. Constitution of Selection Committee.- For the purpose of recruitment to any post, there shall be constituted a Selection Committee as follows : (1) Appointing Authority; (2) An officer belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe, nominated by the District Magistrate if the appointing authority does not belong to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe. If the appointing authority belongs to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe, an officer other than belonging to Scheduled Caste Scheduled Tribe, Minority Community and Backward Class to be nominated by the District Magistrate; (3) Two officers nominated by the appointing authority, one of whom shall be an officer belonging to Minority Community and the other to Backward Class. If such suitable officers are not available in his department or organization, such officers shall on the request of the appointing authority, be nominated by the District Magistrate and on his failure to do so, by reason of non- availability of suitable officers, such officers, shall be nominated by the Divisional Commissioner.” Rule 19 provides for selection and Rule 23 speaks about appointment. A number of vacancies of Class IV employees were in existence in the office of S.D.M. Narendra Nagar and Special Land Acquisition Officer, Tehri Garhwal at Narendra Nagar, District Magistrate Tehri Garhwal for the regular appointment against the substantive vacancies and as such, the selection committee as constituted as per Rule 16 of the aforesaid Rule. The petitioner along with several others appeared before the Selection Committee on 29.06.1994 and the Selection Committee selected 13 persons including the petitioner for appointment on the post of Class IV employee in the Land Record Establishment and also for the Nazarat. The order was passed selecting 13 person, list of whom is quoted below:- dzekad p;fur vH;kFkhZ dk uke firk dk uke fuokl LFkku dk fooj.k dk irk 1 Jh d`".k pUnz iq= Jh lk/kokpUnz gky fuoklh xqIrk gksVy ujsUnz uxj 2 Jh iq"dj flag iq= :Ik flag xzke fViMh iV~Vh [kkl ftyk fVgjh x<oky 3 Jh y{e.k flag iq= vorkj flag xzke Nkj iV~Vh /keku/kU;q fVgjh x<oky 4 Jh pUMhizlkn iq= uRFkh yky xzke cjkyk iV~Vh Dohyh fVgjh x<oky 5 Jh dey flag iq= lwjr flag xzke laM iV~Vh Dohyh fVgjh x<oky 6 Jh lhrk jke iq= ewfrZ jke ujsUnzuxj fVgjh x<oky 7 Jh fojsUnz iq= bUnznso xzke lkMk iV~Vh xqlkbZ fVgjh x<okyA 8 Jh rksrk flag iq= dkY;k xzke cjkyk iV~Vh Dohyh fVgjh x<oky 9 Jh xksfoUn flag iq= cPpu flag xzke cNyh iV~Vh Hkjiwj fVgjh x<okyA 10 Jh izoh.k mfu;ky iq= n’kZu yky xzke <ksyokyk iV~Vh /kekUnU;w fVgjh x<okyA 11 Jh lat; iq= uanu yky xzke [kky iV~Vh e[kkykxh fVgjh x<okyA 12 Jh fodze flag iq= eaxy flag xzke vks’kh iV~Vh /kekUnU;w fVgjh x<okyA utkjr vf/k"Bku gsrq 1- Jh ohj flag iq= txr flag xzke rksyh iV~Vh Hkjiwj fVgjh x<oky ftykf/kdkjh fVgjh x<okyA dk;kZy; ftykf/kdkjh fVgjh x<oky la[;k lek fu;qfDr fnukad 29-6-1994 izfrfyfi fuEufyf[kr dk lwpukFkZ ,oa vko’;d dk;Zokgh gsrq 1- mijksDr leLr p;fur vH;FkhZ;k dk 2- rglhynkj ujsUnzuxj 3- ijxukf/kdkjh ujsUnzuxj g0@ftykf/kdkjh fVgjh x<oky Petitioner has submitted that his name was found place at Serial No. 3 in the Select List as per order dated 29th June, 1994. The petitioner approached the respondents and requested them to make appointment in pursuance of the recommendation of the Selection Committee but of no avail. After that the petitioner has continuously been approaching the respondents. On 3rd April, 1995, the petitioner made a representation to the District Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal and requested him to issue appointment letters. Petitioner has submitted that many persons have been given appointment, whose name appeared in the select list and also persons who were below in select list than the petitioner. Petitioner has referred in paragraph 16 of the writ petition that the candidates, who were placed at Serial No. 2, 5, 8 and 10 namely Sri Pushkar Singh, Sri Kamal Singh, Sri Tota Singh and Sri Pravin Uniyal were given appointment and they are working but the petitioner who was at Serial No. 3 has not been given appointment. Petitioner has submitted that he is entitled for the appointment in accordance with Sub Clause (2) of Rule 23 of that even the appointments on the temporary vacancies have to be made according to the select list. Rule 23 is quoted below:- “23. Appointment.-(1) On the occurrence of substantive vacancies the appointing authority shall make appointments form the list of candidates prepared under Rule 21 or Rule 22, as the case may be, in the order in which their names appear in the list. (2) The appointing authority shall also make appointment in officiating and temporary vacancies from the said list and in the manner referred to in sub-rule (1). (3) When the list of selected candidates in exhausted or no candidate available for appointment from out of the selected candidates ad-hoc appointments may be made by the appointing authority from amongst the eligible candidates : Provided that such appointment shall not last for a period exceeding one year or beyond the next selection under these rules, whichever be earlier.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred judgment passed on 17th February, 2005 in Writ Petition No. 1385 of 1995 that in similar situation Sita Ram was at Serial No. 6. The operative portion of the order passed in the Writ Petition No. 1385 of 1995 is quoted below:- “In the circumstance, the writ petition deserves and is allowed to the extent that if any appointment is already made from the select list mentioned in annexure No. 1 of a person who is belong to the petitioner who is shown at Sl. No. 6 then the appointment letter to the petitioner shall be issued according to the rules within 30 days of production of certified copy of this order before the District Magistrate, Tehri.” A writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondents that if the petitioner stands at Serial No. 3 in the select list, the respondent shall consider him for issuance of the appointment letter in accordance with the Rule within a period of one month after filing of the certified copy of the order. Writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 21.09.2005 Rathour