IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ petition No.328 (S/B) of 2005 1. Brijesh Kumar Tiwari S/o Sri J.P. Tiwari Presently Posted as Assistant Engineer Minor Irrigation Department, Pithoragarh 2. Pramod Kumar Singh S/o Sri R.D. Singh Presently Posted as Assistant Engineer Minor Irrigation Department Tehri 3. Suresh Chandra S/o Sri Raja Ram Presently posted as Assistant Engineer Minor Irrigation Department Nainital … Petitioners Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal through Principal Secretary Forest & Rural Development Commissioner, Govt. of Uttaranchal Dehradun 2. Secretary Minor Irrigation Government of Uttaranchal, Secretariat Dehradun, Uttaranchal 3. Secretary Personnel, Government of Uttaranchal, Secretariat Dehradun 4. Chief Engineer & Head of Department Minor Irrigation, Uttaranchal Dehradun … Respondents Sri S. Dhulia, Senior Advocate assisted by Vipul Sharma, counsel for the petitioner. Sri K.P. Upadhyaya, standing counsel for the State Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to constitute the Departmental Promotion Committee to consider 2 the petitioner for promotion on the post of Executive Engineers in the Minor Irrigation Department, Uttaranchal. 2. The short controversy involved in the writ petition is relating to consideration for promotion of the petitioners on the post of Executive Engineer from the post of Assistant Engineer in the Minor Irrigation Department. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that though in the last Department Promotion Committee (D.P.C.), the petitioners were eligible in view of the U.P. Service of Engineers (Minor Irrigation) Second Amendment Rules, 1995 (hereinafter will be referred to as the Rules), yet they were not considered for the promotion for the reason that they had not completed –7- years of service while the Rules provide that in case the candidates who have put in –7- years of regular service are not available then the candidates who have put in regular service upto –5- years may be considered. This Rule was not adhere to by the D.P.C., therefore, the petitioners were excluded from the consideration. 4. Now the petitioners have completed –7- years of service and are eligible to be considered for promotion. 5. Learned Standing Counsel submits that if the petitioner is eligible according to the Rules than they shall be considered in the next D.P.C. to be held for promotion. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that deliberately despite the post being vacant, the D.P.C. is not being held in order to deprive the petitioners from promotion. 3 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that if the posts are available to be filled up by promotion, the D.P.C. shall be held as early as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed of finally. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) (P.C. Verma, J.) 22.02.2006 R. Dang