IN THE HIGH COURT O’ <ARNATAKA AT BANGALO’’E DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY ‘ JUNE 1998 BEFORE THE HONBLMR JUSTICE V. GOPALAGOsDA RITPTI TION No.1327/1992 BETW B N: G Nagesh, Age: Major, c: First Division Assistant, Sanjay Garx3hl Institute of Accidents and Rehabili tation Centre, Banga1(e. pThTTTION (By Sri Ravi.B. NaIk, Advocate) AND: 1. Tha Director, Sanjay Gandhi Institute of ACidntg and Physia1 MedIcine Institute, 4th B1Ok, Jayanagar, Bangal ore. 2. The Chairman, Finance Committee, Sanjay Gandhi Institute of Accidents Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine Institute, 4th Block, Jayanagar, Banga1e. 3 State of !(arnataka, represented by its Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Dartment, Vic3Bna Scudha, Bangal ore. 4 —2— 4. Sri. Manohar, Age: Major, c: steno— apher, Sanjay Gandhi Institute of ?ccidents Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine Institute, 4th T Block, Jayanagar, F3angal ore. 5. ant. Laxmibai, Age: Major, Occ’: Typist, sanjay Gandhi Irtitute of Accidents Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine Institute, 4th ‘P’ Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore. DESP0NDI*S (Bharathi Nagesh, GA for R—3) * * This Writ petition i 5 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to quash Annexure.A dt. 21.12.91 passed by the Finance Committee, the lst and 2nd respondents in O far as it relates to Itn No,07 and 09 of promoting R-5 from the post of typist to 2nd Divislofl Assistant and promoting R-4 from the post of Stergrapher 8 Senior Assistant etc., Phi, rit Petition Is coming on for hearing thi 9 day, the Court made the following:— ORDER The petitioner is working a irst Division Asgistant in the Sanjay Gandhi Institute of Accjdentg Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine Institute. There are no posts of Senior Assistants provided under th Cadre and Recruit m&it Rules framed by the Institute. Fzther, —3- Typists canrot be promoted ag Second Division Assistants. The 4th respondent is working as Stenographer in the first respondent Institute, Respondents 1 and 2 with a view to favour tii have passed impugrd Reo1ution at AnnexureA changing the cadre of typists to the Second Division Assistants even—though the said posts are not provided under the Recruitment Ru1es Neither respondents I aM 2 nor the Finance Committee of the gaid Institute are empowered under the Cadre and Recruitment Rules to charge the Cadre of Typist to the post of Second Division Assistant. There is no r,ot called Personal Assistant in the first respondent Institute. The Finanoe Committee of the first respondent Institute vide impugrd resolution has considered the proposal for expanding personal section of the Director by creating one Senior Assistant post to the Director in the soale of R 5 .l,60 2,990 and fill up the said pOst by promoting Sri .Manohar Mohite the 4th respondent herein wix, was workir ag Stenographer and approved the post of Personal Assistant subject to the ratifi cation by governing Council of the Institute. hether thig part of the resolution is ratified by Governing Council or not, no material is —4— p’aced before this Court in thi 5 writ petition. 2 The learned counsel Mr .Naik guIntitted that the change of Cadre from Typist to Second Division Assistant and to corEider the case of the 5th respondent to the said post ‘with effect from 1.1.1992 by filling the said post out of qualified C1a 55 —D officials of this Tntitute hag been done. In the impugni order, instead of selecting from among the nualified ClasD employee, of the Institute. The 9threspondene ha been considered and filled i to thp said post. Therefore, the action of the respondents l arid 2 and the Finarre Committee and the first respondent is bad in law. The further case of the petitioner is that a per Cadre and Recruit ment Rules framed y the Institute, it is flOt permissible to promote a Typist to Second Divigon Assistant and Sterapher Sg Second Division AsSIstant urh beino the agP changing the cadre of the typist to the cadre Of Senior s,istant nd filling up that post appointing 5th respondent is contrary to the Cadre and ecruit— ment Ruleg and ‘without authority of law. The further action of the Finarre Crrijttee in accepting the proposal of the Director of the first respondent and expanding big personal section by creating the rost of one Senior Assistant in the scale referred to above and filling the said post by appointing the 4th respondent ig also rt stainable in law. 3. The respondents in this case have been duly served but they remained absent. Petition avermentg have not been controverted that the action of the inance Committee of the first respondit passing resolution particularly at Item No.7 and 9 at AnnexuieA are in accordance with the Cadre & Recruitment Rules. Hence I pass the fol1ing order: This rt petition is allowed. The impugn order Annexure—A is auashed only so far ag the Resolution passed on Item No.7 and 9. No costs. Sd! JUDGE