High Court · 2025

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Presence: - Mr. V.K. Kohli, Senior Advocat e, assist ed by Mr. I P Kohli, Advocat e for appellant . None appears for t he respondent . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - J U D G M E N T H o n ’ b l e M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J. H o n ’ b l e A sh i sh N a i t h a n i , J. ( Pe r : H o n ’ b l e M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J.) This int ra- Court appeal has been filed by Bharat Heavy Elect ricals Lt d. challenging t he j udgm ent and order dat ed 1.5.2017, passed by learned Single Judge in WPSS No. 1895 of 2014. Judgm ent rendered by learned Single Judge is ext ract ed below: “ Pet it ioner part icipat ed t he select ion process for t he post of Art isan. He sat in t he writ t en exam inat ion on 06.11.2011. He was int erviewed on 28.12.2011. The pet it ioner was found suit able for t he post , in quest ion. He was m edically exam ined on 16.02.2012. He was found m edically unfit due t o “ Diabet es” . Thereaft er, pet it ioner again t wo Medical Boards. He was finally referred t o Safdarj ung Hospit al, New Delhi. The pet it ioner was suffering from Diabet es beyond t he norm al param et ers. 1 However, in t he m eant im e, t he Recruit m ent and Prom ot ional Rules, were am ended on 06.08.2012, whereby t he disease, suffered by t he pet it ioner, was dilut ed. Accordingly t o t he new norm s, pet it ioner and sim ilarly sit uat e persons could be appoint ed t o t he t he post of Art isan. The candidat ure of pet it ioner was rej ect ed on 27.08.2012, being a case of acut e diabet es. The reason assigned for not offering t he appoint m ent t o t he pet it ioner was t hat he could not hold heavy m achinery et c. However, t here is no scient ific proof of t he sam e. Since, t he Rules have been am ended on 06.08.2012, t he pet it ioner’s ailm ent would not affect his working as an Art isan. The Rules of 06.08.2012 are m ore progressive. it pre- supposes t hat Accordingly, t he writ pet it ion is allowed. The im pugned order dat ed 27.08.2012 is quashed and set - t o offer aside. The appoint m ent t he select ion process which com m enced in t he year 2012, wit hin a period of four weeks from t oday. respondent s are direct ed t o t he pet it ioner, pursuant t o Pending applicat ion, if any, st ands disposed of accordingly.”

2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for t he appellant subm it s t hat t he writ pet it ioner ( respondent herein) was not m eet ing t he param et ers as his blood sugar was found t o be beyond perm issible lim it s. He subm it s t hat learned Single Judge allowed t he writ pet it ion by giving benefit of t he am ended rules, overlooking t he fact t hat t he am endm ent was carried out in t he rules on 6.8.2012, while select ion process st ood com plet ed m uch before am endm ent of t he rules. He furt her subm it s t hat candidat ure of t he writ pet it ioner ( respondent herein) was rej ect ed on

27.8.2012, t herefore benefit of am ended rules could not have been given t o him .

3. We find subst ance in t he subm issions m ade by learned Senior Counsel for t he appellant . Since t he 2 param et ers regarding blood sugar was relaxed only on

6.8.2012, when t he rules were am ended, while select ion process was com plet ed as per t he unam ended rules, t herefore, t he benefit am endm ent m ade subsequent ly could not have been ext ended t o t he writ pet it ioner.

4. Even ot herwise also, t he writ pet it ioner has report edly passed away on 12.1.2018 and effect and operat ion of t he im pugned j udgm ent was st ayed by t he coordinat e Bench vide order dat ed 14.6.2017, t herefore t he j udgm ent im pugned before us has becom e unexecut able.

5. I n such view of t he m at t er, special appeal is allowed. I m pugned j udgm ent is set aside. ( A sh i sh N a i t h a n i , J.) ( M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J.) 2 1 .4 .2 0 2 5 Pr PRABOD H KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f2 1c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EF DF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C91 957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR 3