Rakesh Sharma & Ors vs Ch./M.D. Uttaranchal Power Corp. & Ors

2. The facts very briefly are that written tests and interviews were conducted in the years 1977, 1979 and 1981 for promotion of Operating Staff (Technical Grade-II) to the post of Junior Engineer in the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board (for short `the UPSEB') under Regulation 17 of the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board Subordinate Electrical and Mechanical Engineering Service Regulations, 1972 (for short `the Regulations'). Mandip Singh and others, who had taken the written test and interview in 1977, moved the Allahabad High Court in a batch of Writ Petitions and on 28.08.1989 a Division Bench of the High Court by its order directed the UPSEB to declare the select list of candidates who had appeared in 1977 examination and the interview and after exhausting the same to make appointments from the select list of the candidates who had appeared in the 1979 written examination and interview. On 24.09.1999, the UPSEB issued an Office Memo cancelling the examination conducted in 1985 because it was not possible to promote the Technical Cadre employees to 3 the post of Junior Engineer on the basis of examination conducted in the year 1985 till the order dated 29.08.1989 of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Mandip Singh & others was complied with. On 09.11.2000, the new State of Uttaranchal, now renamed as Uttarakhand, was carved out of the erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh and the Uttaranchal Power Corporation Limited (for short `the UPCL') became the successor of UPSEB for the State of Uttarakhand and started functioning with effect from 01.04.2001 and adopted the Regulations for its employees. On 05.04.2003, the Selection Committee of UPCL recommended that there was no hindrance for promoting the candidates selected on the basis of 1985 examination as there were vacancies to the post of Junior Engineer after promotion of the selected candidates of the years 1977 and 1979. Thereafter, a list of employees, who had taken the examinations conducted by the UPSEB in the years 1977, 1979 and 1985, was prepared and they were promoted to the post of Junior Engineer by the Board of UPCL after 4 relaxation under Regulation 31 of the Regulations.

3. These promotions were challenged in Civil Writ Petition Nos. 3 of 2003 (S/S), 979 of 2002 (S/S), 7195 of 2001 (S/S) and 803 of 2003 (S/S) in the High Court of Uttaranchal. The four Writ Petitions were heard by a learned Single Judge and allowed by a common order dated 25.10.2004. The learned Single Judge held that the promotions of employees of the cadre of Technical Grade-II to the post of Junior Engineer on the basis of 1985 examination cannot be said to be legal after cancellation of 1985 examination by the Office Memo dated 24.09.1999 of the UPSEB, unless either Regulation 17, which provides for promotion on the basis of written examination and interview, was amended or the order of cancellation of the 1985 examination was recalled. The learned Single Judge directed the UPCL to hold examination afresh complying with the provisions of Regulation 17 of the Regulations. The learned Single Judge quashed the seniority list of Junior Engineers dated 17.11.2001 which was based on the promotions held on the basis 5 of 1985 examination and further observed that the promotions made on the basis of the examinations held in the years 1977 and 1979 shall remain unaffected. The learned Single Judge, however, observed that those already promoted or holding the charge of Junior Engineers will not be disturbed and their functioning shall be subject to the result of the fresh examination to be held.

4. Rakesh Sharma and others, who had been promoted as Junior Engineers on the basis of the 1985 examination, challenged the order of the learned Single Judge before the Division Bench of the High Court of Uttaranchal in Special Appeal Nos. 96 of 2004 and 103 of 2004 but the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the Special Appeals by order dated 28.02.2006. The Division Bench agreed with the reasons given by the learned Single Judge, but observed that promotees on the basis of the 1985 examination shall be treated as working on ad hoc promotion and shall be allowed to continue subject to their appearance and passing in the examination and 6 the interview in accordance with Regulation 17 of the Regulations and those selected afresh will be treated to have been appointed from the date of promotion. The UPCL also filed Special Appeal Nos.105, 107, 112 and 113 of 2008 against the order dated 28.02.2006 and by a separate order dated 28.02.2006 the Division Bench of the High Court sustained the order of learned Single Judge and disposed of the Special Appeals with the direction that those promotees, who had retired, shall not be affected by the order of the learned Single Judge.

8. We further find that although in the judgment in Mandip Singh & Ors. v. UPSEB & Ors. the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court did not declare the selections made on the basis of 1985 examination and interview to be in any way illegal, the UPSEB cancelled the selections by Office Order dated 24.09.1999, which is quoted hereibelow :

13. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeals are allowed and the judgments of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos. 3 of 2003 (S/S), 979 of 2002 (S/S), 7195 of 2001 (S/S) and 803 of 2003 (S/S) and the impugned judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court are set aside. There shall be no order as to costs.

IN SPECIA L LEAVE PETITION (C) NOs.5278-5279 of 2009 AND 4827 of 2009 These Special Leave Petitions were listed for hearing along with Civil Appeal Nos.3448 of 2008 and 3476 of 2008.

3. We have today disposed of Civil Appeal Nos.3448 of 2008 and 3476 of 2008. These Special Leave Petitions may now be listed for hearing.