2025:UHC:3817-DB SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSB/587/2021 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. (Per: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 1. Mr. Vinod Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. D.K. Bankoti, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Mr. Sobhit Saharia, learned counsel for respondent no. 2. 4. Petitioner, who was serving as Senior Administrative Officer in District Judgeship at Pithoragarh, filed this writ petition in 2021, seeking the following reliefs:- (i) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned advertisement dated 10.12.2021 (Annexure No. 1) issued by the respondent no. 2. (ii) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of Chief Administrative Officer on the basis of seniority. 5. Petitioner is aggrieved by the stipulation in the impugned advertisement / notification dated 10.12.2021 that promotion to the post of Chief Administrative Officer shall be made on the criteria of merit, after holding a suitability test. He contends that since there is no reference to the post of Chief Administrative Officer in Rule 20(5) of the Uttarakhand Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 2007, therefore, promotion to the said post has to be 2025:UHC:3817-DB made on the criteria of ‘seniority’ and not ‘merit’. He also relies upon a notification dated 22.12.2016, whereby ‘Determination of Eligibility Period for Promotion to the Post of Ministerial Grade Cadre in Service Under the State of Uttarakhand Rules’, was amended. Rule 4(1) of the said Rule provides that the post of Chief Administrative Officer shall be filled by promotion by applying criteria of seniority subject of rejection of unfit, from amongst substantively appointed Senior Administrative Officers, who have served as such for minimum one year on the first day of relevant year of recruitment and have also rendered total service, not less than 25 years. 6. A counter affidavit is filed by Mr. Kapil Kumar Tyagi, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pithoragarh, stating that the post of Chief Administrative Officer was created after implementation of staffing pattern, in terms of Government Order dated 05.04.2017. It is further stated that three posts, namely, Senior Administrative Officer, Sadar Munsarim (Administrative Officer) and Reader Grade-I (Administrative Officer) were upgraded and redesignated as ‘Chief Administrative Officer’, upon implementation of staffing pattern. 7. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 submits that the Rules relied by petitioner, namely, ‘Determination of Eligibility Period for Promotion to the Post of Ministerial Grade Cadre in Service Under the State of Uttarakhand Rules, 2011’ are not applicable to the establishment under the control of the High Court and the said Rules are applicable only to subordinate Offices of 2025:UHC:3817-DB the State Government. He refers to Rule 2 of the said Rules for buttressing this contention. 8. We find substance in the said submission. Rule 2 of the said Rules provides that these Rules shall apply in the matter of promotion to Ministerial Cadre in Offices subordinate to the State Government and further that the said Rules shall not apply to Uttarakhand Secretariat, State Legislative Assembly, Lokayukta, Public Service Commission, High Court and High Court Advocate General & establishment under its control. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Rule 20(5) of Uttarakhand Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 2007 although provides that posts of Sadar Munsarim and Senior Administrative Officer are selection posts and the District Judge can conduct suitability test of the persons serving on the feeder posts, however, since the criteria for promotion to the post of Chief Administrative Officer is not prescribed in the said provision, therefore, the post of Chief Administrative Officer has to be filled by promotion on the criteria of ‘seniority subject to efficiency’ as per provision contained in Rule 20(2) of the said Rules. 10. The said contention is bereft of merit. The post of Chief Administrative Officer came into being after implementation of staffing pattern in terms of Government Order dated 05.04.2017 and earlier, post of Chief Administrative Officer, was not available in the establishment of subordinate courts. Therefore, the Rules are silent 2025:UHC:3817-DB regarding criteria for promotion to the said post. However, promotion exercise cannot be kept in abeyance for in definite period as persons, serving on the lower posts, have a legitimate expectation and they also have a right to be considered for promotion. Thus, the Competent Authority rightly initiated the exercise for supplying available vacancy on the post of Chief Administrative Officer, by promotion. 11. Rule 20(5) of Uttarakhand Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 2007 provides that Sadar Munsarim and Senior Administrative Officer, which are positions subordinate to Chief Administrative Officer, shall be filled by promotion on the criteria of merit-cum- seniority. The Rules also provide for holding suitability test for promotion to the aforesaid two positions. Thus, the contention that post of Chief Administrative Officer, which is the highest position in the ministerial cadre, should be filled on the criteria of seniority alone, cannot be accepted. 12. In every Government Organisation, promotion to the highest position in a cadre is required to be made on the criteria of “merit” unless the applicable Rules provide otherwise. In the present case, Sadar Munsarim and Senior Administrative Officer, which are the feeder posts for promotion to the post of Chief Administrative Officer, are required to be filled on the criteria of merit; in such a situation, the post of Chief Administrative Officer, which is the highest promotional post available to ministerial employees, cannot be directed to be filled by applying the 2025:UHC:3817-DB criteria of seniority, as contended by the petitioner. 13. Even otherwise also, Uttarakhand Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 2007 governs the service conditions of ministerial employees serving in civil courts and also lays down criteria of promotion to various posts. Name of the Rules, relied by the petitioner, namely, Determination of Eligibility Period for Promotion to the post of Ministerial Grade Cadre in Service Under the State of Uttarakhand Rules, 2011 suggests that it deals with minimum qualifying service needed for promotion to a ministerial post in subordinate Government Office. The criteria for promotion to the post of Chief Administrative Officer, if mentioned in the said Rules, will not override the criteria of promotion mentioned in Uttarakhand Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 2007. 14. Mr. Vinod Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that promotion exercise is to be held as per Rule 13 of the Uttarakhand Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 2007 and it provides that selection has to be held through Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. 15. The said contention is bereft of merit. Rule 13 lays down the procedure of direct recruitment to the service and it has no application to promotion of existing member of service to higher post. 16. In such view of the matter, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned notification dated 10.12.2021. 2025:UHC:3817-DB 17. A coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.01.2022 had provided that the selection process in terms of impugned notification may continue, but no final decision shall be taken by the Authorities thereon, without express leave of this Court. 18. We, accordingly, dispose of the writ petition by permitting District Judge, Pithoragarh to declare the result of the selection held pursuant to the impugned notification dated 10.12.2021 and to act upon the recommendation made by the Selection Committee, within six weeks from today. 19. Registry is directed to communicate this order to concerned District Judge, within 48 hours. (Ashish Naithani, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 13.05.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08d 1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F46 10C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.05.15 11:20:01 -07'00' 2025:UHC:3817-DB