The main legal point established in the judgment is that a post available in the promotee quota cannot be converted into a post available for direct recruitment, and the seniority of candidates is a crucial factor in promotion decisions.

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J.

Since the controversy involved in both these writ petitions are identical, the claims are identical and the impugned order is identical, therefore, for the purpose of convenience, the same are being decided by a common judgment and order with the consent of the counsel for the petitioners.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 15.05.2006 whereby the single post in the promotee quota has been directed to be filled up by way of direct recruitment from a reserved category candidate.

3. The facts of the case in brief are that there is an institution known as G.N.K. Inter College (the College) Civil Lines, Kanpur Nagar. The said Institution is recognized and also receives grant-in-aid and is governed by the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the Regulations framed thereunder as well the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act, 1982.

4. The petitioner Rajiv Shukla was initially appointed as an ad hoc Assistant Teacher in the LT Grade on 14.07.1992 on account of a vacancy created due to promotion of one Radha Krishna Shukla in the Lecturer Grade. The petitioner joined in the LT grade on 17.07.1992 and is working continuously since then. On 5.07.2003, the services of the petitioner were regularized on the post of Assistant Teacher LT grade w.e.f. 30.12.2000.

5. One Shiv Prasad Gupta, Lecturer in Commerce retired from service on 30.06.2003 on attaining the age of superannuation. In the resultant vacancy, the petitioner was directed to take charge of Classes 11 and 12 w.e.f. 1.07.2003 on officiating basis. By resolution of the Committee of Management dated 8.08.2003, it was resolved to promote the petitioner on the post of Lecturer Commerce and requisition in this regard was forwarded to the D.I.O.S., Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur on 21.08.2003. However, by the impugned order dated 15.05.2004, the D.I.O.S. has rejected the claim of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Lecturer (Commerce) on the ground that such a proposal does not fulfill the requirement of Rule14(3) of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board Rules, 1998. The second ground taken by the respondent No. 3 for rejecting the claim of the petitioner is that there were 10 posts in the promotee quota, out of which 9 posts are already filled up and only one post remains to be filled up. But since the quota of Scheduled Castes is not complete, therefore, the said post needs to be filled up by a Scheduled Caste candidate by converting the post in the promotee quota, into one for direct recruitment.

6. I have heard Sri Manish Goyal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3. List has been revised. None appears for respondent No. 1. The order is being dictated in open Court.

7. So far as the first ground taken for rejecting the claim of the petitioner for appointment as Lecturer (Commerce) is concerned, it may be noted that the petitioner had filed Writ Petition No. 76607 of 2005 challenging the rejection by the D.I.O.S. of the requisition sent by the Committee of Management, and this Court vide its order dated 19.12.2005 held as follows:

"The facts of the case as brought on record, demonstrate that the petitioner completed five years of his continuous/continuance service in September 2003. In this view of the matter the petitioner would be presumed to have acquired the qualification as on 1st July, 2004 and as such the petitioner can be considered as on date for promotion on the post in question. It has also been stated that the post has not been filled up by any other mode till date and in still available.

Let the Committee of Management, respondent No. 4 reconsider the promotion of the petitioner on the post in question in accordance with rules and forward the proposal to the competent authority for consideration afresh. The Committee of Management shall proceed to consider the claim of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document