1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1257/1995 Harish Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order :: 30.03.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr Shankar Singh, for the petitioner. Mr Anil Kumar Singh, for the respondents. ... The petitioner, a work-charged Mistri (Civil) by this petition for writ is seeking a direction for appointment by way of promotion as Supervisor (Civil) with Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner. As per the petitioner the respondent-UIT is having certain vacancies in its work- charge cadre relating to the post of Supervisor (Civil), but despite eligibility possessed by the petitioner no appointment by way of promotion is made to the post aforesaid. The petitioner has also given reference of two persons to whom appointment as supervisor was accorded. Per contra, stand of the respondents is that no permanent vacancy relating to the post of Supervisor (Civil) in work-charge cadre is available with them. The persons, reference of whom is given by the petitioner, were direct recruits to the post of Supervisor and they were possessing qualification of Bachelor of Engineering, and as such, their case cannot be equated with case of the petitioner, who is claiming 2 appointment by way of promotion. This Court by an order dated 4.4.2007 directed the respondent-UIT to verify present position with regard to availability of the post of Supervisor. Accordingly, an affidavit sworn in by Sh. Om Prakash, Secretary, UIT is filed stating therein that no sanctioned vacant post of Supervisor is yet available. A counter affidavit has been filed by the petitioner stating therein that number of persons are holding the post of Supervisor with the respondent-UIT, and as such, the fact regarding non-availability of the vacancy relating to post of Supervisor is not correct. To substantiate the contention reliance is placed by the petitioner upon a document Annexure-19 dated 29.1.1990 whereby certain persons including four Supervisors were assigned duties regarding maintenance of certain sites in the city of Bikaner. Heard counsel for the parties and examined the record. As per Rajasthan Public Works (Building and Roads including Gardens, Irrigation, Water-works, Ayurvedic) Work-charged Employees Service Rules, 1964 a Work Mistri (Civil) on having an experience of 10 years is eligible to be considered for promotion as Supervisor (Civil). The petitioner, therefore, is certainly eligible to be considered for promotion to the post aforesaid. However, the stand of the respondents is that no vacancy presently is available with them. It is also stated that 3 certain appointments by way of direct recruitment were made to the post aforesaid as per Rules, however, no person junior than the petitioner is given promotion. Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the petitioner is eligible to be considered for promotion as Supervisor under the Rules of 1964. Promotion was not given to him due to non- availability of vacancy. The persons shown in document Annexure-19 as Supervisors are whether the permanent supervisors or the persons working on adhoc basic or whether those persons are junior to the petitioner or not, no pleadings in this regard are made in the petition or even by way of filing rejoinder. In these facts and circumstances of the case no direction as claimed can be given, however, the respondents are directed to consider candidature of the petitioner for promotion as Supervisor (Civil) on availability of sanctioned post and vacancy of Supervisor if he comes within the zone of consideration and is otherwise found eligible. No order as costs. (GOVIND MATHUR), J. Jgoyal '