LexNARSING PRASAD versus ANIL KUMAR JAIN & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 5 S.C.R. 177 NARSING PRASAD v. ANIL KUMAR JAIN & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 3153 of 2012) MARCH 27, 2012 [DALVEER BHANDARI AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] Service Law: A B Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (Appointment c and Conditions of Service of Chief Engineer) Regulations, 1990 - Regulations 7, 8 and 11 - Post of Chief Engineer - Appointment of appellant by the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, to officiate as the Chief Engineer - Challenged by respondent, senior most in the feeding cadre 0 - High Court observing that in the absence of merit selection, a senior most person is entitled to hold the charge unless there is any legal impediment, held that the respondent was entitled to hold the post of Chief Engineer till regular selection - On appeal, held: On a perusal of the order passed by the E High Court, it is not clear that the finding of the selection committee was brought to the notice of the High Court - Order of the Chairman of the Uttar Pradesh A vas Evam Vikas Parishad, was brought before this Court for the first time - As per Regulation 7, the Selection committee is required to be constituted by the Board - However, in the instant case, the decision to appoint the appellant was taken by the Chairman - Supreme Court has passed an order of status quo relating F to promotional posts in certain civil appeals which is still in force - Thus, a regular promotion cannot take place and, the direction of the High Court to hold regular selection within two G months is untenable - Considering the sensitive nature of the post and the duties to be performed by the incumbent, selection committee directed to be constituted by the Board to consider the suitability of all the eligible candidates for the 177 H 178 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 5 S.C.R. A purpose of holding the post of the Chief Engineer - Till then appellant to continue holding charge - Order passed by the High Court set aside. The Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad passed B an order that the appellant, a Superintending Engineer, would hold the post of Chief Engineer on officiating basis till the regular selection was made. Respondent challenged the appointment before the High Court on the ground that he was senior in the cadre of the Superintending Engineer and thus, the charge should be given to him. The High Court quashed C the order passed by the Parishad. Therefore, the appellant filed the instant appeal. Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 0 HELD: 1.1 On a perusal of the order passed by the High Court, it is not clear that the finding of the selection committee was brought to the notice of the High Court. For the first time, a document contained in Annexure P-6 showing the order of the respondent No. 2-Chairmar: of E the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, was brought before this Court. Regulation 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (Appointment and Conditions of Service of Chief Engineer) Regulations, 1990 lays down the procedure for selection for F promotion. Regulation 11 stipulates for preparation of list by the selection committee. The selection committee is required to be constituted by the Board as per Regulation 7. On a perusal of Annexure A-6, it appears that the decision was taken by the Chairman but not by the Board. The High Court directed that if any officiating G appointment is to be made, the case of the first respondent should be first considered and he should be given the charge unless there is any legal impediment. There is further direction to hold a regular selection within a maximum period of 2 months. [Para 7] [182-E-H] H NARSING PRASAD v. ANIL KUMAR JAIN & ORS. 179 1.2 This Court had passed an order of status quo A relating to promotional posts in certain civil appeals and the said order is still in force. Thus, a regular promotion cannot take place and, therefore, the direction of the High Court in that regard is untenable. However, as in the interest of the administration, someone has to remain in charge, the employer, i.e., the Parishad can choose someone to hold the officiating charge. Regard being had to the sensitive nature of the post and the duties to B be performed by the incumbent, it is appropriate to direct that the selection committee be constituted by the Board c within a period of four weeks which shall consider the suitability of all the eligible candidates for the purpose of holding the add
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.