IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT PETITION NOS.31424-31425 OF 2014 [S-CAT] BETWEEN:
1. THE DIRECTOR OF CENSUS OPERATIONS, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL OF INDIA, (GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS) 2/A, MANSINGH ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 011.
2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF CENSUS OPERATIONS, E&F WING, 7TH FLOOR, KENDRIYA SADANA, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 034. … PETITIONERS [BY SRI.SRINATHA B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. UNNIKRISHNAN M., ADVOCATE] AND:
SRI. C.D. ANABANDAN, SON OF SRI. DORAIRAJ, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.246, SHANMUGAM COMPOUND, 1ST CROSS, GAYATHRI SCHOOL, VIJINAPURA, BENGALURU-560 016, WORKED AS S.I. GRADE-II, DIRECTOR OF CENSUS, OPERATIONS KARNATAKA, KENDRIYA SADANA, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 034. … RESPONDENT [BY SRI. V.S.NAIK, ADVOCATE] * * * THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.02.2013 AT ANNEXURE-H PASSED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH, BANGALORE IN ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.464 OF 2012 ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY RAVI MALIMATH J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru [‘Tribunal’ for short] in Original Application No.464 of 2012, dated 07.02.2013, in granting retrospective proforma promotion to the respondent herein, excluding monetary benefits of salary, but that he will be entitled to all the consequential benefits like pension, seniority etc. from 04.01.2008, the respondents before the Tribunal have filed these petitions.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the order passed by the Tribunal is erroneous. That granting of retrospective proforma promotion to the respondent is incorrect. That the respondent is not entitled to any consequential benefits like pension, seniority etc.
3. The same is disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent.
4. On hearing learned counsels, we do not find any merit in these writ petitions. The material on record would indicate that the seniority list was prepared in the grade of Senior Compilers and in that, 13 posts which arose for promotion for Statistical Investigator Grade-III in the pay scale of Rs.5,000–8,000, 13 persons were accommodated. Sri. V.Muniyappa was accommodated against the Scheduled Caste category in the cadre of Statistical Investigator Grade-
III. Thereafter, in the review Departmental Promotion Committee [‘DPC’ for short] held on 28.08.2008, Sri. V.Muniyappa’s appointment was confirmed with effect from 04.01.2008. The Director of Census Operations, Karnataka reported an anomaly which had arisen, wherein the respondent could not be granted ad-hoc promotion because even though he was in the zone of consideration, in the earlier DPC conducted on 09.04.2008 that post was not yet vacated by the said Sri. V.Muniyappa as Review DPC for him was yet to be conducted, which was conducted only on 28.08.2008. It is at that point the respondent was accommodated with effect from 04.01.2008. However, since he has not held the post from the said date, monetary benefits were denied to him. However, consequential benefits like pension, seniority etc. from 04.01.2008 were granted.
5. Under these circumstances, we do not find any error committed by the Tribunal that calls for interference. Thus, the promotion granted is in accordance with the facts and circumstances of the case. What has been granted to the respondent is precisely what he is entitled to in law. The denial of monetary benefits is also justified in view of the fact that the respondent was not holding the post earlier to 04.01.2008. Under these circumstances, and in the absence of any ground to interfere with the impugned order of the Tribunal, the writ petitions are dismissed. Rule discharged.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE Ksm*