IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
K.M. JOSEPH, ALOK SINGH, JJ.
Ramesh Chandra Joshi & another - Appellants
Versus
Iqbal Ahmad & others - Respondents
Special Appeal No. 53 of 2013
Decided on : 09-12-2016
JUDGMENT : Urdu Translator-cum-Junior Clerk - Statutory Rules - 1980 Rules - 1994 Rules - The court analyzed the statutory rules governing the appointment and promotion of Junior Clerks and Urdu Translators-cum-Junior Clerks. The court found that the two positions were governed by separate sets of rules and were not part of the same cadre. The court also noted that the 1994 Rules did not provide for promotion to higher posts, unlike the 1980 Rules. The court concluded that the Urdu Translators-cum-Junior Clerks were not entitled to the same promotional avenues as Junior Clerks. The court also considered various government orders and found that they did not override the statutory rules. The court held that the practice followed in other districts, which allowed for common seniority lists and promotions, was in violation of the statutory framework. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Single Judge, and dismissed the writ petition.
K.M. JOSEPH, C.J.
Appellants have filed this Appeal with leave by order dated 29.04.2013. Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are the writ petitioners and, hence, referred to as such.
2. The writ petitioners filed the writ petition seeking to quash Annexure No. 7 order dated 07.08.2007 and Annexure No. 9 order dated 25.08.2007 passed by respondent Nos. 1 & 3 therein. The further direction sought was to treat them and the ordinary Junior Clerks as an integrated combined cadre employees; prepare a combined seniority list according to the seniority rule; then, to consider promotions to the posts of Senior Assistant; and further to confer other service benefits.
3. The writ petitioners were appointed on 01.03.1995 on the post of Urdu Translator-cum-Junior Clerk. The salary paid to the ordinary Junior Clerks in various Government Departments and that to Urdu Translators-cum-Junior Clerks was one and the same. They claimed that the next promotional post of Urdu Translator-cum-Junior Clerk as well as ordinary Junior Clerk is the post of Senior Clerk and promotion has to be made on the basis of seniority. There is reference to Writ Petition (S/S) No. 494 of 2007 filed by the appellants to which they were not parties and, pursuant to which, an order was passed that Urdu Translators-cum-Junior Clerks and ordinary Junior Clerks are different cadre and absorption is not possible. This is done by order dated 07.08.2007, which is challenged by the writ petitioners. It was complained by the writ petitioners that the said order was passed without considering the true import of the rules and in gross violation of the rules. The writ petitioners, on 13.08.2007, made representation to the Commissioner and the third respondent, namely, the District Development Officer, Dehradun, dismissed the said representation vide order dated 25.08.2007 based on the first order, namely, order dated 07.08.2007 and held that the writ petitioners are separate cadre employees and they are not entitled for combined seniority and promotion along with the Junior Clerks.
4. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition. It was, inter alia, reasoned that, going by the nomenclature of the posts under the rules, they are treated at par and there is no difference and distinction except the nomenclature. There is reference to orders dated 20.08.1994, 09.09.1994 and 03.02.1995; but these orders were not produced before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge states that it is sought to be suggested that the post of Junior Clerk is governed by the 1980 Rules and the post of Urdu Translator-cum-Junior Clerk is governed by the 1994 Rules; but those Rules were not produced before him. The designation of Urdu Translator-cum-Junior Clerk includes the cadre of Junior Clerk and these employees are having additional skill of translating. It was found that even after bifurcation, in the order of restructuring of the Government employees in Sr. No. 10, the pay-scale of erstwhile Junior Clerk and Urdu Translator-cum-Junior Clerk, which have been re-designated as Junior Assistant and Translator-cum-Junior Assistant respectively, and also Computer Operator is the same. Separate cadre would have been created if it was intended to separate the two cadres. The theory of separate cadre was not accepted. The Government Department, according to the learned Single Judge, should have notified not only the Junior Assistants, but also Urdu Translators-cum-Junior Assistants, as, in terms of the restructuring order, they are also interested and affected persons. Non-hearing of the writ petitioners before passing order dated 07.08.2007 was found to be unsustainable. The further order was also found to be consequently not sustainable. The learned Single Judge did not find any explanation with regard to the statements that no combined seniority list was made for Dehradun district; whereas
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.