IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. (S/S) 1081 of 2011 J. P. Anthwal and another …Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ….Respondents Present : Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rajendra Kotiyal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Additional Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Advocate for the interveners. Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Heard Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Rajendra Kotiyal, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Additional Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Advocate for the interveners. The petitioners are Forest Guards in the Forest Department who have challenged the Special Recruitment Drive for the year 2004-05 for promotion from the post of Forest Guards to the post of Foresters. Admittedly as per rules applicable to such promotion the appointing authority of a Forester is Divisional Forest Officer and the feeding cadre of the Forester is Forest Guard. The promotions are done in order of seniority subject to rejection on unfit. It is further an admitted fact that 50% of the vacancies are to be filled by way of promotion and remaining 50% by way of direct recruitment. It is also an admitted case that in the present recruitment drive as a special case all the existing vacancies of Forester will be filled by way of promotion. Meaning thereby the vacancies which are 2 liable to be filled by way of direct recruitment have now to be filled by way of promotion from Forest Guards. The only change which has been made in the present recruitment drive is that instead of circle wise seniority the State has prepared a State wise seniority and thereafter the promotions are being made. These promotions have been challenged by the petitioners on the ground that merely by way of a Government Order it cannot be done which is in violation of Rule which provides that not only the 50% vacancy of the Forester has to be filled by way of promotion but the same has to be filled on the basis of circle wise seniority and not by State wise seniority. The grievance of the petitioners has some basis inasmuch as the rules provide circle wise seniority while such promotions are being made. Learned counsels appearing for the private respondents as well as the State have pointed out a provision in Government Order dated 10.9.2010 namely Rule 3(iv) which says that in case appropriate candidates are not available in a circle who can be appointed for the post of forester, such posts can be filled by Forest Guards from another circle. This provision being totally in violation of law is liable to be quashed and presently being quashed. It is though clarified that the right of the petitioners is not being prejudiced by the present recruitment drive if posts which are meant for them under the 50% circle wise quota need not be disturbed. Subject to the above, no interference is called for. It is clarified that the respondents while making promotions from the post of Forest Guard to Forester which have to be filled only by way of promotion, will make such promotion only circle wise. In case the vacancies are not filled from the circle they shall be 3 carried forward to the next year. However, for the remaining 50% which is the quota of direct recruitment, the respondents are at liberty to carry on the said promotions in order of the seniority based on the State wise seniority list. With the above observations, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 03.08.2011 Avneet