Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Applicant, who was in the zone of consideration in the year 2005 for the first time could not be included in the Select List of 2005 as he was lower in the seniority position and the officers senior to him with 'Very Good' grading could only be included due to statutory limit on size of the list. In 2006, for one vacancy the zone of consideration was 03, hence applicant was not in the zone of consideration. In regard to availability of service record, it is submitted that the State Government when sends the proposal for convening meeting of the Selection Committee to the U.P.S.C., along with requisite record of eligible officers, viz. integrity certificate, status of disciplinary/criminal proceedings, statement of adverse remarks in the ACRs, communication thereof etc, Court directions, complete ACR etc., the proposal is scrutinized in the office and if some deficiencies are observed, U.P.S.C. seeks requisite clarification/document from the State Government being the Cadre Controlling Authority of the State Civil Service Officers.

(b) For the years 2003 and 2004 there were only two vacancies in each year and, therefore, only 12 officers in order of seniority (as shown in the seniority list as Annexure A-12) were in the zone of consideration for these two years.
(c) Applicant is at Serial No. 20 of the seniority list and came in the zone of consideration only from the year 2005. The selection for the vacancies for the years 2003 and 2004 cannot, therefore, be challenged or questioned by the applicant because he was not even in the zone of consideration for those vacancies. Thus, the present application as against the persons selected for the vacancies for these two years is not maintainable and is liable to the rejected.

20. We may now advert to the seniority list produced by the applicant at pages 185-189 in which Applicant's name appears at Serial No. 20. Names of respondents No. 5 to 15 are at Serial Nos. 2 to 13 in the said list. Thus, admittedly all the selected respondents are considerably senior to the applicant.

21. As far as the select list for 2003 is concerned, there were 2 vacancies and as per the Rule, zone of consideration is 3 times. Thus, 6 persons were in the zone of consideration. Admittedly, applicant was not in the zone of consideration for this year where selection was made as follows:

1. Sh. C. Somashekhar (R-5) Sl. No. 2 in Seniority List
2. Sh. Venkannagowda B. Patil (R- 6) Sl. No. 3 in Seniority List

22. Again for the year 2004, there were 2 vacancies for which zone of consideration was 6. Applicant was at Serial No. 17 but he was still outside the zone of consideration. The senior most 2 persons as under were selected:

1. Sh. Niranjan K.R.(R-7) Sl. No. 4 in Seniority List
2. Sh. Narayanaswamy R (R-8) Sl. No. 5 in Seniority List Thus, the applicant has no ground to challenge the selection of respondents No. 5 to 8. This being the admitted position, was fairly conceded by learned Counsel for the applicant.