HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 11552 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J. 1. Heard. 2. The vires of Rule 5(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Co-opearative and Panchayat Audit Service Rules, 2015 as amended vide notification dated 27.01.2025 has been challenged. The only argument advanced in this regard before us is that the petitioner was promoted as District Audit Officer in August, 2019 and is due to retire in March, 2026. Prior to the amendment dated 27.01.2025, the qualifying service prescribed as an eligibility condition for being considered for promotion to the post of Deputy Director (Audit) was three years of service as such on the first day of year of recruitment which the petitioner fulfilled in 2023 but there were no vacancies at that time. By the time the vacancies occurred in 2025, prior to it, Rule 5(2) of the Rules 2015 was amended on 27.01.2025 increasing the qualifying service to seven years instead of three years. The submission is that he will never fulfill this criteria as he will retire in March, 2026, on completion of about a few months less than seven years as District Audit Officer. This, according to him, is discriminatory and results in excessive classification in the sense that others who were working on the post of District Audit Officer, they were considered and promoted as Deputy Director based on unamended rule and the unamended eligibility condition of three years service whereas by the time the petitioner was entitled to be considered, the Rule has been amended. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rahul Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Mukul Gupta .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Finance Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 3. We are afraid this cannot be a ground for declaring the Rule ultra-vires. Obviously, those promoted earlier in point of time were senior to the petitioner and there were vacancies for such promotion. Had there been vacancies available in 2023 or till 26.01.2025, the petitioner could have also raised a claim but there were no vacancies. In fact, the petitioner's counsel does not know the date on which the vacancies occurred in the year 2025 whether prior to or subsequent to amendment of 27.01.2025. We are, therefore, not convinced and do not find any ground for declaring the aforesaid Rule as ultra-vires. We, however, leave it open for the petitioner to raise a claim, if otherwise permissible, if he finds that there were vacancies existing prior to 27.01.2025 against which he was within the zone of consideration for promotion but no process of promotion was initiated under the unamended Rule. 4. Subject to above, the writ petition is disposed of. September 25, 2025 Shanu/- WRIA No. 11552 of 2025 2 (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHANU SUMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench