Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.
Prabodh Kumar Pathak S/o Chandra Prabhaker Pathak – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru Principal Secretary Public Works Dept. – Respondents
Writ A No. 1511 of 2010
Decided on : 31-05-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 313 - United Provinces Service of Engineers (Building and Road Branch) (Class II) Rules, 1936 - Rules 5, 9 - U.P. Public Works Department Group-B Civil Engineering Service Rules, 2004 - J.E. Service Rules, 1951 - Rule 3 - Civil Appeal - Promotion of Diploma - Held, Court finds stitch time saves nine although not a legal maxim four corners to dispute engaging attention of this court promotion for Assistant Engineers Uttar Pradesh Public Works Department centrifugal issue petitions which had been unsettled by issuance of said letter cognate letter Government orders had a rippling effect leading to a swarm of petitions filed self-same issue which is under consideration bunch of matters - Court finds that this situation could had been avoided by caution by state Diploma Holders or Degree Holders been given their fair rightful & equal opportunities of promotions as envisaged - Writ petitions disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
A. Introduction:
(1) The present issue, engaging the attention of this Court has a chequered history of litigation. Essentially, it revolves around the struggle relating to the promotion of Diploma holder Junior Engineer and Degree holder Junior Engineer to the post of Assistant Engineers in the Uttar Pradesh Public Works Department, wherein in the bandwagon, several other stake holders including the direct recruited Assistant Engineers, have also jumped to further complicate the whole issue. Evidently, the primary issue is relating to determination of vacancies arising in the direct and promotion quota for the period 1997-98 to 200304 and a secondary issue is relating to the manner this promotion quota can be filled in view of the prevailing United Provinces Services of Engineers (Building & Road Branch) Class-II Rules, 1936, its periodical amendment, Government Orders and most importantly the Judgments passed by this Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in that context.
(2) Although, several judgments and orders have been passed by this Court as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which impacts the promotions of these Junior Engineers during the said litigations era of 1997-98 to 2003-04, however with the remand order dated 21.08.2019 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3695/2007 “Aitbal Singh Vs. Pramod Shankar Upadhyaya & Ors.”, by virtue of which these writ petitions have been remanded for re-hearing before this Court, all the issues relating to the promotions including the quota stands revived. The relevant extract from the remanding order of the Hon’ble Apex Court can be profitably quoted as herein below:
We, therefore, set aside the impugned judgment and order and remit the matter to the High Court. We request the High Court to decide the matter afresh within six months after hearing the parties afresh”.
(3) Thus, the following writ petitions being remanded vide the aforesaid order dated 21.08.2019 passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 6569, 6570, 6571-6572, 6573, 6574 of 2019 (arising out of SLP (C) Nos.28395, 28917,28535-28536 & 33760 of 2011, 3435 of 2012 impugning the Judgment dated 08.09.2011 passed by a Division Bench of this Court) are being re-heard :
| Sr. No. | Writ Petition No. | Cause-title |
| 1. | 1511(S/S) of 2010 | Prabodh Kumar Pathak and others Vs. State of U.P. and others. |
| 2. | 6943(S/S) of 2007 | Diploma Engineers Sangh PWD and others Vs. State of U.P. and others |
| 3. | 7232(S/S) of 2007 | Arvind Kumar Pandey and others Vs. State of U.P. and others |
| 4. | 7649(S/S) of 2007 | Brajesh Chandra Mishra and others Vs. State of U.P. and others |
| 5. | 3173 (S/S) of 2008 | Diploma Engineers Sangh PWD and others Vs. State of U.P. and others |
| 6. | 3422(S/S) of 2008 | Yatendra Babu and others Vs. State of U.P. and others |
| 7. | 3448(S/S) of 2008 | Noorul Huda and others Vs. State of U.P. and othe |
Point of Law : Public orders made by public authorities are meant to have public effect and are intended to effect actings and conduct of those to whom they are addressed and must be construed object....
Promotion – In absence of any statutory provision or rule made thereunder or under proviso appended to Article 309 of Constitution of India, once an incumbent is appointed to post according to rules,....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the requisition for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) was sent in compliance with the statutory rules, and the Rules, 1968 p....
Promotion for eligible employees based on qualifications must be timely and fair, not delayed arbitrarily, upholding the principles of legitimate expectation and constitutional rights.
Amended promotion rules' 45% quota for Junior Engineers with 7 years service contains no Diploma/Degree requirement; unqualified seniors eligible; DPC rejection on qualification grounds invalid.
Promotion cannot be denied from eligibility and vacancy date merely due to departmental delay in convening DPC for clarifications; review DPC under service handbook Clause 16.29 grants notional benef....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
