Skip to content

Sri B L Venkatesh Vs. the Principal Secretary Karnataka Legislature - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberWRIT PETITION NO. 32237 OF 2010 (S-RES)
Judge
AppellantSri B L Venkatesh
RespondentThe Principal Secretary Karnataka Legislature
Appellant AdvocateSri. D S JOSHI, ADV
Respondent AdvocateSri. RAGHAVENDRA G GAYATHRI. AGA

Excerpt

[ram mohan reddy, j.] this petition piled under article 226 & 227 op the constitution of india praying to quash the impugned official memorandum dtd 5.6.10 issued as in annex-j, original of which is at page 46 as also pay fixation official memorandum dtd.....of extending promotion to the petitioner as against a post kept vacant for direct recruitment and placing him above his seniors, the promotion order was withdrawn by order dated 5.6.2010 annexure 'j' and the basic pay of the petitioner was brought down to ?.8,825/- per month by order annexure-k hence the writ petition.2. learned government counsel is correct in his submission that the promotion to the post of assistant was to be effected only if the vacancy available for promotees and not by filling up the vacancies ment for directs recruitment. the mistake having been committed by the respondent in promoting the petitioner as agate a vacancy meant for direct recruitment is sought to be corrected and as a consequence led to the order annexure 'j' withdrawing the promotion with effect from 10.9.2004 and making the promotion effective from 22.6.2009, the date on which s vacancies arose, which ought to be filled up by way of promotion. vet again the respondent having noticed the infirmity in placing the petitioner above his seniors in the seniority list of assistants, was sought to be redone in the light of the withdrawal of the promotion order^ which too is in accordance with.....

Judgment

ORDER

1. Petitioner while as a Junior Assistant in the respondent Karnataka Legislature Secretariat was extended a promotion under Rule 32 of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules on 10.9.2004. on independent charge basis though he was not entitled to the same since the post was reserved for direct recruitment. The petitioner was later on promoted as Assistant on 22.6.2009 Annexure D' and on the issuance of the seniority list of Assistants Annexure 'E' on 1.1.2010 representations were received by the petitioners seniors pointing out to the anomaly and that they could not be placed below the petitioner in the seniority list. It appears that the petitioner's request for promotion with effect from 10.9.2004 was considered and the official memorandum dated 8.1.2010 Annexure 'G' was issued while the basic pay in the grade of Assistant was fixed at .9,050/- per month by order dated 29.1.2010. Annexure-H The respondent having noticed the mistake committed in the matter of extending promotion to the petitioner as against a post kept vacant for direct recruitment and placing him above his seniors, the promotion order was withdrawn by order dated 5.6.2010 Annexure 'J' and the basic pay of the petitioner was brought down to ?.8,825/- per month by order Annexure-K Hence the writ petition.

2. Learned Government counsel is correct in his submission that the promotion to the post of Assistant was to be effected only if the vacancy available for promotees and not by filling up the vacancies ment for directs recruitment. The mistake having been committed by the respondent in promoting the petitioner as agate a vacancy meant for direct recruitment is sought to be corrected and as a consequence led to the order Annexure 'J' withdrawing the promotion with effect from 10.9.2004 and making the promotion effective from 22.6.2009, the date on which S vacancies arose, which ought to be filled up by way of promotion. Vet again the respondent having noticed the infirmity in placing the petitioner above his seniors in the seniority list of Assistants, was sought to be redone in the light of the withdrawal of the promotion order^ which too is in accordance with law.

3. In the result, writ petition being without merit is accordingly rejected.


Save Judgments · Add Notes · Store Search Results · Organize Client Files Start your Free Trial