Jitender Singh Khurana @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors.

In this writ petition, the petitioners have sought following relief(s):

 “It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed; and by an appropriate writ, order or direction:

i. The respondents may be directed to amend Schedule appended to the Sr. No.2 and 3 of the Schedule of the Rajasthan Technical Education (Engineering) Service Rules, 2010

as amended by the amended Rules of 2017 by providing promotional avenue from the post of Senior Lecturer to Head of Department.

ii. The order dated 15.03.2017 (Annexure 09) may kindly be quashed and set aside.

iii. The respondent authorities may kindly be directed to consider the petitioners for promotions in their respective cadre as per their eligibility.Â

iv. Until the present writ petition is decided, the DPCs on the post of Principal should not be convened in Rules 2010.

v. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which the facts and circumstances of the case warrants be issued. vi. Costs of the writ petition be allowed in favour of the

petitioners.â€​

 Except prayer No.2, for other prayers, earlier a writ petition being D.B.C.W.P. No.14743/2016 (Jitendra Singh Khurana & 8 Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) was filed,

and said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2017. The relevant and operative portion of the said order reads thus:Â

 “It is settled principle of law that this Court cannot legislate the law. The rules and regulations for regulating service conditions and avenue of the promotions in the

Government service is required to be framed by the Legislature and the State. Therefore, petitioners are required to raise their grievance before the State.

In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to raise their grievance before the competent authority of the State. The petitioners may

file a representation before the competent authority and raise their grievance within a period of one month from the date of receiving certified copy of this order. Upon received

such representation, it, it is expected from the respondentState that the such representation will be decided within period of three months.â€​ Â

 In pursuance of the aforesaid order, a representation was filed by the petitioners, which is placed no record as Annex.8. The representation filed by the petitioners was

considered by the State of Rajasthan vide their order dated 15.03.2017 whereby the prayer of the petitioners was rejected, which is under challenge in this writ petition. The order

dated 15.03.2017 reads as under: -

“jktLFkku ljdkj rduhdh fâ€​k{kk foHkkx

Øekad ,Q 10 ¼4½ r- fâ€​k-@2017Â

                                                                  Â

                                                        t;iqj] fnukad 15-3-17

vknsâ€​k

 ekuuh; U;k;kyk; }kjk ;kfpdk la- 14743@2016 Jh ftrsUnz flag [kqjkuk o 8 vU; izkfFkZ;kas cuke jkT; esa ikfjr fu.kZ; fnukad 27-1-2017 eas dh ikyuk lqfufâ€​pr fd;s tkus

gsrq izkFkhZ;kas }kjk izLrqr vH;kosnu dk fuLrkj.k fd;s tkus gsrq i=koyh izLrqr dh xbZA i=koyh dk ijh{k.k fd;k x;kA

 ekuuh; U;k;ky; }kjk ;kfpdk la-14743@2016 Jh ftrsUn flag [kqjkuk o 8 vU; izkfFkZ;kas cuke jkT; esa ikfjr fuk.Z; fnukad 27-1-2017 eas fuEufyf[kr funsZâ€​k iznku fd;s gS fd In

view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to raise their grievance before the competent authority of the State. The petitioners may file

a representation before the competent authority and raise their grievance within a period of one month from the date of receiving certified copy of this order. Upon received such

representation, it, it is expected from the respondent-State that the such representation will be decided within period of three months.Â

izkFkhZx.kkas }kjk ;g vuqrks’k pkgk x;k gS fd jktLFkku rduhdh fâ€​k{kk lsok fu;e 2010 eas HksnHkko viuk;k x;k gS fd ,d vksj rks iz/kkukpk;Z la;qDr funsâ€​kd ds in dks

inksUufr ls Hkjs tkus gsrq lajf{kr dj fn;k x;k gS ogha nwljh vksj foHkkxk/;{k lgk;d funsâ€​kd ds inkas dks lh/kh HkrhZ ls Hkjs tkus dk izko/kku fd;k x;k gSA vr% jktLFkku rduhdh

fâ€​k{kk lsok fu;e 2010 ds fâ€​kM~;wy ds Øe la[;k 3 eas 100 izfrâ€​kr inksUufr ds izko/kku eas laâ€​kks/ku fd;s tkus gsrq fuosnu fd;k x;k gSaA

 ,vkbZlhVhbZ dh vf/klwpuk 30-12-1999 ds vuqlkj foHkkxk/;{k in gsrq U;wure “kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk Bechlor and Masters degree of appropriate branch in

Engineering/Technology with First class or equivalent either Bachlors of Master’s level ,oa iz/kkukpk;Z gsrq “kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk Qualification as above for the post of Head

of Department ds lkFk lHkh inkas dh lh/kh HkrhZ ls Hkjs tkus dk izko/kku gSA

 rduhdh fâ€​k{kk lsok fu;e 2010 eas Hkh foHkkxkx/;{k inkas dks Hkjs tkus gsrq U;uwre “kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk Bechlor and Masters degree of appropriate branch in

Engineering/Technology with First class or equivalent either Bachlors of Master’s level ds lkFk lh/kh HkrhZ ls Hkjs tkus dk izko/kku gS ,oa iz/kkukpk;Z in gsrq Bechlor and

Masters degree of appropriate branch in Engineering/Technology with First class or equivalent either Bachlors of Master’s level with 15 years Experience in teaching out of

which at least 5 years shall be at the level of Head of Department or equivalent ;ksX;rk ds lkFk inksUufr ls Hkjs tkus dk izko/kku fd;k x;k gSA

 rduhdh fâ€​k{kk lsok fu;e 2010 jkT; ljdkj }kjk 8-1-2010 dks tkjh fd;s x, bu fu;ekas ds tkjh djus ls iwoZ foHkkx eas fu;e 1973 izpfyr FksA rduhdh fâ€​k{kk lsok fu;e 2010 ds vuqlkj

fnukad 31-12-2009 rd fu;e 1973 ls dh x;h inksUufr lajf{kr dh xbZA

 orZeku eas rduhdh fâ€​k{kk lsok fu;e 2017 eas ,vkbZlhVhbZ ds izko/kkukas ds vuq:i izoDrk] foHkkxk/;{k rFkk iz/kkukpk;Z gsrq leLr inkas dks lh/kh HkrhZ ls Hkjus dk izko/kku

dj fn;k x;k gSA bl izdkj bu laoxksZa eas izko/kku iw.kZr% ,vkbZlhVhbZ ds izko/kkukas ds vuq:i gks tkus ds dkj.k fdlh izdkj dk HksnHkko ugha jg x;k gSA vr% vc dksbZ vkSj

dk;Zokgh okafNr ugha gksus ds dkj.k vH;kosnu rnksuqlkj fuLrkfjr fd;k tkrk gSA

Sd/-

¼jktgal mik/;k;½ vfr- eq[; lfpo rfâ€​k-â€​

 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that promotion is right of the employee and it is the duty of the State Government to provide promotion avenues in view of judgment

of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Food Corporation of India & Ors. Vs. Parashotam Das Bansal & Ors. reported in (2008) 5 SCC 100. He thus argued that the order

dated 15.03.2017 may kindly be quashed and the desire amendment be ordered to be made in the Rules for promotion avenue from post of Senior Lecturer to Head of

Department.Â

  After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and respondents, it emerges from the prayer clause that the petitioners are seeking direction to the State Government to

legislate law for the purpose of promotion. In our opinion, even according to the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of FCI Vs. parshotam Das Bansal (supra), it is

settled principle of law that the employees of the State have no fundamental right of promotion but have right to be considered for promotion because promotional is normal

incident of service.

 Upon perusal of the order dated 15.03.2017 passed by the State Government, it is abundantly clear that the prayer of the petitioner has been considered objectively and the

State Government being employer decided not to amend the Rules as prayed by the petitioners. It is also clear from the Rules that promotion avenues are available in the Rules

but not as desired by the petitioners. In view of the fact that the petitioners are claiming promotion avenues on particular posts, no such direction can be given by this Court to

legislate law for the purpose of promotion as desired by the employees. We are, therefore, of the firm opinion that no interference is called for in this writ petition filed by the

petitioners to amend the Rules to grant promotion avenue as per the choice of the petitioners.

 Consequently, the instant writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. No costs.