RAN BAHADUR SINGHversusState of UP AND 4 OTHERS

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                          WRIT - A No. - 14676 of 2024

Ran Bahadur Singh
                                                                .....Petitioner(s)
                                      Versus

State Of Up And 4 Others
                                                             .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)              :   Satya Kumar Singh, U.S. Verma
Counsel for Respondent(s)              :   C.S.C.

Court No. - 33
                     HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

1. Heard Sri U.S. Verma, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri
Manish Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

2. Since counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the
parties and the learned counsel for the parties do not propose to file any
further affidavit, the writ petition is being decided at the admission stage.

3. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was selected in the year 1995 by
the U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad on the post of Sub-Registrar
(Stamp & Registration) and his first posting was as a trainee on 22.01.1998
at Chail Sadar, District Allahabad. The writ petitioner came to be transferred
from one place to another. It is also the case of the writ petitioner that in the
Seniority List, his name found place at Sl. No.145 and Sri Sant Kumar
Rawat, Sri Chandan Prasad and Sri Ashok Katheira were placed at Sl. Nos.
146, 147 and 148. Though according to the writ petitioner, the promotional
exercise for promotion on the post of Assistant Inspector General
(Registration)/ Assistant Stamp Commissioner stood was undertaken, but the
claim of the writ petitioner for promotion was not considered and in the
meantime on 31.07.2022, the writ petitioner superannuated. Since the writ
petitioner was not accorded the promotional grade for the year 2019 in terms
of the Government Order dated 23.08.1997, which constrained the writ
petitioner to file the present writ petition.

4. This Court entertained the present writ petition on 20.09.2024 while
seeking instructions, order whereof is quoted hereinunder:-
                                                                WRIA No. 14676 of 2024
                                     2


"Mr. S.C. Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel is granted three day's time to seek
instructions in the matter from the Principal Secretary, Department of Stamp and
Registration, Lucknow. The Principal Secretary is ordered to furnish adequate
instructions to Mr. S.C. Upadhyay to answer this petition.
Lay as fresh on 25.09.2024.
Let this order be communicated to the Principal Secretary, Department of Stamp and
Registration, Lucknow through the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow by the
Registrar (Compliance) within 24 hours."

5. Thereafter, on 22.10.2024, the following orders have been passed:-

"In pursuance to the previous orders passed by this Court, the Standing Counsel has
obtained instructions in the matter and has handed over a copy of the same to the
Court which is taken on record.
The Standing Counsel represents respondent nos. 1 & 2. No notices are required to
be issued to respondent nos.3 to 5 at this stage.
The Standing Counsel prays for and is granted eight weeks' time to file his counter
affidavit. The petitioner shall have four weeks' thereafter to file his rejoinder
affidavit.
List before the Registrar after expiry of the aforesaid period who shall fix any date for
admission if counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been filed by the parties.
The Registrar may, if necessary, grant further opportunities to the parties to file their
affidavits but not more than two further opportunities shall be granted by the
Registrar."

6. A counter affidavit has been filed sworn by Assistant Inspector General
(Registration), Bulandshahr on behalf of Respondent no.2, to which a
rejoinder affidavit has been filed.

7. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has made a statement at Bar that he
is not questioning the promotion of Respondent nos. 3 to 5, as there is no
prayer made in the relief clause, however, the writ petitioner had only
impleaded respondent nos. 3 to 5 as a party-respondents just in order to show
that his case is rather on better or similar footing. In view of the said
statement as well as the order proposed to be passed, this Court is not issuing
notice to the Respondent nos. 3 to 5.

8. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has submitted that inaction on the
                                                                WRIA No. 14676 of 2024
                                    3


part of the respondents in not considering the claim of the writ petitioner for
promotion on the post of Assistant Inspector General (Registration)/
Assistant Stamp Commissioner is not only illegal, but also tantamounts to
violation of Article 14 read with Article 16 of the Constitution of India for
the simple reason that in the Seniority List, the name of the writ petitioner
stood placed at Sl. No.145, Sri Kant Rawat, Sri Chandan Prasad and Sri
Ashok Kumar at Sl. No.146, 147 and 148, and they were accorded
promotion, but the writ petitioner had not been accorded promotion.
According to him, Pradeep Rana, Devendra Kumar and Brijesh Kumar were
accorded promotion but the claim of the writ petitioner has been side tracked
without any justification.

9. Sri Manish Kumar, learned Standing Counsel on the basis of the
averments made in the counter affidavit submits that the claim of the writ
petitioner could not be considered on account of various factors including
the fact that there were certain incumbents, who post-enforcement of Uttar
Pradesh Re-organization in 2000 were working in Uttarakhand and
thereafter post-exercise undertaken by virtue of the order passed in Writ-A
No.3775 of 2023, Sheel Bhandra Chandra vs. State of U.P., now certain
directions were issued by the Writ-Court and now consideration would be
made for promotion of the writ petitioner as he in this regard seeks to rely
upon para-18 of the counter affidavit.

10. I have heard the submissions so made across the Bar and perused the
records.

11. Apparently, the writ petitioner claims to be appointed on the post of Sub-
Registrar (Stamps & Registration), who superannuated on 31.07.2022. He
seeks promotion on the post of Assistant Inspector General (Registration)/
Assistant Stamp Commissioner. Allegation has been made that the junior to
the writ petitioner as noted above stood promoted, but the case of the writ
petitioner stands side-tracked. In para-18 of the counter affidavit, the
following averments have been made:-

"18. That the contents of paragraph No. 25 of the writ petition are not admitted as
stated, hence denied. In reply thereto it is submitted that the petitioner has a right to
be considered for promotion and his representation on the matter of notional
promotion will be considered in the current facts and circumstances in accordance
                                                                                            WRIA No. 14676 of 2024
                                                                    4


                                    with law."

                                    12. Since it is the stand of the respondents that the claim of the writ
                                    petitioner would be considered, though the writ petitioner stands retired on
                                    notional basis, thus without delving into the issue any further, the writ
                                    petition stands disposed of in the following terms:-

                                    (a) The writ petitioner shall approach the second respondent by way of
                                    comprehensive representation along with self attested copy of the writ
                                    petition and the certified copy of the order by10.04.2026.

                                    (b) On the said motion, second respondent, Assistant Inspector General
                                    (Stamp & Registration), Bulandshahr shall accord consideration to the claim
                                    of the writ petitioner for promotion and do the needful within a period of
                                    three months bearing in mind the eligibility, suitability and other factors,
                                    which are germane for the purposes of consideration and criteria for
                                    promotion.

                                    March 19, 2026
                                    N.S.Rathour

                                                                                            (Vikas Budhwar,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad