UJVN Limited & Another vs Sunil Thakur & Others

Petitioners have challenged judgment dated 24.12.2020 rendered by Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal, Dehradun in Claim Petition No. 33/DB/2019. Since the same judgment is under challenge in both the writ petitions and grounds are also the same, therefore both the petitions are being heard and decided together by this common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, facts of Writ Petition (S/B) No. 258 of 2021 alone are being considered and discussed here.

Mr. Sunil Thakur (respondent no. 1 herein) was appointed as Labourer, Category P-I in Uttarakhand Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited w.e.f. 15.07.2008; while Mr. Girish Kumar (respondent no. 2) was appointed as such w.e.f. 06.10.2006. The next promotional post available to both was Oiler/skilled labourer in Category P-2, and Mr. Sunil Thakur (respondent no. 1) was promoted to the said post vide order dated 05.07.2014 by giving benefit of relaxation in qualifying service; while, Mr. Girish Kumar (respondent no. 2), who was not given benefit of such relaxation, was so promoted w.e.f. 30.06.2015.

Thereafter, promotion exercise was again initiated pursuant to office communication dated 06.08.2018 for supplying vacancies in TG-II category during selection year 2018-19. Mr. Girish Kumar (respondent no. 2) was promoted as P-4 on 08.03.2019. In that promotion exercise, Mr. Sunil Thakur (respondent no. 1) was removed from the eligibility list vide order dated 10.10.2018, passed by Executive Engineer, on the ground that since he was given benefit of relaxation in qualifying service earlier, therefore, he cannot be given that benefit again. The said order was communicated to Mr. Sunil Thakur (respondent no. 1) on 01.12.2018.

Mr. Sunil Thakur approached Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal, seeking a direction to promote him to the post of P-4 from the date when Mr. Girish Kumar (respondent no. 5 in claim petition) was promoted. Learned Tribunal allowed the claim petition.

Thus, feeling aggrieved, Mr. Girish Kumar as well as the employer (Uttarakhand Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited) has approached this Court.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that Mr. Sunil Thakur did not challenge the order dated 10.10.2018, passed by Executive Engineer, whereby his name was removed from the eligibility list on the ground that he cannot be given benefit of relaxation in qualifying service, twice. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Mr. Girish Kumar (respondent no. 2) is senior as he was appointed earlier in point of time as Labourer. He points out that Mr. Girish Kumar was appointed as Labourer on 06.10.2006; while Mr. Sunil Thakur (respondent no. 1) was appointed as Labourer on 15.07.2008. He further submits that Mr. Sunil Thakur was given benefit of relaxation in qualifying service for promotion to the post of Oiler, Category-P3, therefore, he could not be given relaxation again for promotion to next higher post. He submits that since Mr. Girish Kumar was not given benefit of relaxation in qualifying service earlier, therefore, he was given relaxation in the exercise held for promotion to the post of P-4.

He submits that since an express order was passed against Mr. Sunil Thakur (respondent no. 1) for removing him from the field of eligibility, which was also communicated to him on 01.12.2018, therefore, without setting aside the said order, no relief could have been granted to Mr. Sunil Thakur. He submits that the order dated 10.10.2018 passed by Executive Engineer was brought to the notice of learned Tribunal and it was taken note of in paragraph no. 5 of the impugned judgment. Thus, he submits that learned Tribunal was not justified in interfering with the promotion given to Mr. Girish Kumar.

We find substance in the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners.

Since the name of Mr. Sunil Thakur was removed for the eligibility list by passing an express order by the Competent Authority, and that order was also communicated to Mr. Sunil Thakur, therefore, without setting aside the said order, whereby, he was declared to be ineligible, no relief could have been granted to Mr. Sunil Thakur nor he could have any grievance against promotion given to Mr. Girish Kumar. Learned Tribunal, however, overlooked this vital aspect of the matter. Thus, the judgment rendered by learned Tribunal is unsustainable.

The writ petitions are, accordingly, allowed and the impugned judgment dated 24.12.2020 is hereby set aside.