# Deputy Director General (National Cadet Corps) and another v. Sanjai Kumar & another - **Citation:** (2002) 2 ILRA 564 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2002-07-16 - **Case number:** Special Appeal No. 348 of 2002 - **Bench:** S.K. Sen, C.J. Ashok Bhushan - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/deputy-director-general-national-cadet-corps-and-another-v-sanjai-kumar-another-39851 - **Pages:** 2 ## Headnote Constitution of India, Article 226Promotion from clerical cadre to officer cadre promotion policy dated 23.10.92 providing cut off date 1.12.97 awarding 2 additional marks in each year to those who were actually working in rural areas on the prescribed dated held arbitrary- an employee having working experience in rural areas entitled for 2 additional marks for each years subject to maximum 10 marks. Held- Para 20 ## Text http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002 564 (Delivered by Hon'ble S.K. Sen, C.J.) 1. Heard Shri A.K. Dixit, Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. 2. The counsel for the petitioner contended that documents of the vehicle has been surrendered on 29.1.2000. Our attention has been drawn to annexure-1 to the writ petition. A perusal of annexure-1 to the writ petition reveals that said document is only an application seeking No Objection Certificate. There is nothing no record to show that the petitioner has complied with the provision of Rule 22 of U.P. Motor Vehicle Taxation Rule 1998 where in the procedure has been prescribed in the case of withdrawing the vehicle from use. 3. It is well settled that where a provision is made in a statute prescribing the particular procedure, that particular procure has to be followed and in the event of non compliance of that procedure, no benefit can be claimed by a person. 4. In view of above, there is no infirmity in the order dated 18.6.2002. We are not inclined to grant any relief to the writ petition. 5. The writ petition being without any merit fails and is dismissed. --------- APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 16.7.2002 BEFORE THE HON'BLE S.K. SEN, C.J. THE HON'BLE ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. Special Appeal No. 348 of 2002 Deputy Director General (National Cadet Corps) and another ...Petitioners Versus Sanjai Kumar & another ...Respondents Counsel for the Appellants: Sri Shabha Jeet Yadav S.C. Counsel for the Respondents: Sri S. P. Kesarwani S.C. Sri N. L. Pandey U.P. Temporary Government Servant (termination of Service) Rules 1975- Compassionate appointment - always to be treated as permanent appointmenttermination order. Held- illegal. Held- Para 3 We are of the opinion that the Judgment of learned single judge which is based on division bench decisions in Ravi karan Singh's case needs no interference in this appeal. However, it will be open to the appellants, if so advised, to proceed in accordance with law. The petitioner respondent no I shall be reinstated in service forthwith and shall be entitled to pay including all consequential benefits as already directed by the learned Single Judge. Case law discussed: 1992 (2) AWC 976 (Delivered by Hon'ble S. K.Sen, C.J.) Present: For the Appellants: Shri Shabhajeet Yadav . http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in 2 All] Dy. Director General (N.C.C.) and another V. Sanjai Kumar 565 For the respondents: Shri S. P. Kesarwani 1. This Special appeal is directed against judgment of Learned Single Judge dated 11.2.2002 allowing the writ petition, where the Learned Singh Judge held that the appointment of writ petitioner having been made on compassionate ground, the same cannot be treated to be a temporary appointment and as such the order dated 5.12.1996 terminating has services under U.P. Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules of 1975 is set aside. 2. It is not in dispute that before passing the termination order, no show cause notice was served on the petitioner nor the petitioner was given any opportunity to explain his misconduct, if any, irregularity and unauthorized absence. It is true that if the appointment is confirmed, there cannot be simplicitor termination. On the allegation against the petitioner which has been noted by Learned Single Judge in his judgment of court in 1999 (2) A.W.C. 976 Ravi Karan Singh Versus State of U.P. & Others. The Division Bench in the aforesaid case has held that an appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules has to be treated as permanent appointment otherwise if such appointment is treated to be a temporary appointment, then it will be followed that soon after appointment, the services can be permanent and this will nullify the very purpose of Dying in Harness Rules. 3. We are of the opinion that the Judgement of Learned Single Judge which is based on Division Bench Decision in Ravi Karan Singh's case needs no interference in this appeal. However, it will be open to the appellants, if so advised to proceed in accordance with law. The petitioner respondent no.1 shall be reinstated in service forthwith and shall be entitled to pay including .all consequential benefits as already directed by the Learned Singh Judge. 4. Accordingly, we are of the view that there is no merit in this special appeal, Special appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. --------- ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 06.05.2002 BEFORE THE HON'BLE M. KATJU, J. THE HON'BLE RAKESH TIWARI, J. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 39672 of 2000 V. K Srivastava ...Petitioner Versus Union Bank of India through General Manager and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Shri Ashok Bhushan Shri Anil Bhushan Counsel for the Respondents: Shri Vivek Ratan Constitution of India, Article 226Promotion from clerical cadre to officer cadre promotion policy dated 23.10.92 providing cut off date 1.12.97 awarding 2 additional marks in each year to those who were actually working in rural areas on the prescribed dated held arbitrary- an employee having working experience in rural areas entitled for 2 additional marks for each years subject to maximum 10 marks. Held- Para 20