JUDGMENT :

ALOK ARADHE, J.

1. These appeals arise from the impugned final judgment and order dated 08.08.2019 passed by the High Court¹[The High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital] in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 68 of 2013. In order to appreciate the grievance of the appellants, relevant facts necessary for deciding these appeals are set out below.

FACTS

2. These batch of Civil Appeals involve the question of entitlement of the promotees to count their ad hoc service for the purposes of computing seniority. On 17.02.2006, the Uttaranchal Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’) were notified. The respondent nos. 3 to 6 in Civil Appeal No. 3072 of 2024 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the promotees’) were originally appointed on the post of Naib Tehsildars. On 01.07.2007, the promotees were confirmed on the post of permanent Tehsildars by way of regular promotion. The Departmental Promotion Committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘the DPC’) was constituted which held its meeting on 12.09.2007 and took note of the acute shortage of Civil Service Officers in the State. In the aforesaid meeting of the DPC it was noted that the process of direct recruitment was time consuming and the only option was ad hoc promotion. The DPC recommended 10 Tehsildars, including the promotees for promotion to the post of Deputy Collector on ad hoc basis.

3. The promotees, on 01.10.2007, were promoted to the post of Deputy Collector as stop-gap arrangement/temporary arrangement till the posts are filled by the Commission²[The Uttarakhand Public Service Commission] by direct recruitment. The Additional Secretary of the State Government on 06.12.2007 forwarded a requisition for regular promotion highlighting the vacancies in the cadre of Deputy Collector. On 21.05.2008, the Commission sought information about filling up the posts of Deputy Collectors by promotion.

4. The appellants in the Civil Appeal No. 3072 of 2024 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘direct recruits’) in pursuance of an advertisement dated 26.12.2004 issued by the Commission for direct recruitment for the posts of Deputy Collector were selected and appointed in the month of August 2009.

5. The Commission by a notification dated 08.04.2010 promoted 15 permanent Tehsildars to the post of Deputy Collectors. Being aggrieved, by non-inclusion of their names in the aforesaid order, the promotees filed the Writ Petition No. 113 of 2010. The said writ petition was disposed by an order dated 27.04.2011 directing the Commission to review the promotion of permanent Tehsildars to the post of Deputy Collectors. Thereupon, the Commission issued a proceeding on 07.05.2012 by which promotees were promoted to the post of Deputy Collector with effect from 07.05.2012.

6. Being aggrieved, by the aforesaid order, which was made effective from 07.05.2012 instead of 01.10.2007, the promotees filed a writ petition namely, Writ Petition (S/B) No. 68 of 2013 seeking regular promotion to the post of Deputy Collector with effect from 01.10.2007 and to delete the condition of putting the promotees on probation for a period of two years. The direct recruits filed an application seeking impleadment in the writ petition, which was allowed.

IMPUGNED JUDGMENT

7. The High Court vide impugned judgment dated 08.08.2019 inter alia took note of the Rule 24(4) of the Rules and Regulation 5(a) of the Uttaranchal Public Service Commission (Limitations of functions) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as ‘2003 Regulations’) which stipulate that, in case, a person continues in a higher post either in a temporary or officiating basis for a period of more than one year, then approval of the Commission shall be obtained. It was held that the State Government cannot be permitted to take advantage of its own wrong for failing to refer the matter to the Commission in terms of Regulation 5(a) of the 2003 Regulations. It was further held that the promotees continued as Deputy Collectors on a temporary/offi