Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing counsel for the respondents.
The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the opposite party nos. 4 and 3 to determine the seniority of the petitioner on the post of Inspector.
The petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Sub-Inspector on 10.02.1998. The seniority list of Sub-Inspectors (Civil Police) of batch 2000-2014 was issued on 16.01.2016 wherein the name of the petitioner founds place. Thereafter, promotion on the post of Inspector resolved to be done by the respondents.
The claim of the petitioner for grant of promotion on the post of Inspector was placed before the Departmental Promotion Committee and vide order 16.01.2016 other Sub-Inspectors were granted promotion and the claim of the petitioner was not considered on the ground that there were four minor censure entries in his service.
Against the censure entries, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate authority which has been rejected and thereafter, petitioner filed a claim petitioner which has been allowed and the Appellate Authority has deleted one minor punishments. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition No.13734 (S/S) of 2019 which was finally disposed of with the direction to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of promotion vide order dated 16.05.2019 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition).
In pursuance to the order of this Court dated 16.05.2019, the petitioner has been granted promotion on the post of Inspector vide order dated 02.08.2019 from the year, 2017.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Junior to the petitioner have been granted promotion w.e.f. 16.01.2016, so the promotion granted to the petitioner from the batch 2017 is not justifiable in law. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of R.K. Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, 1991 Supp. (2) Supreme Court Cases, 126 and submitted that in case in the service record of an employee there is adverse entry and on the said point of time the claim of the employee was not taken into consideration and subsequent point of time the censure entry has been set aside by the competent authority or competent Court of law then his claim is liable to be considered from the date juniors have been granted promotion. Relevant paragraph of the judgement is quoted herein below :
"2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that this appeal must succeed. There is no dispute that during the pendency of this appeal the appellant's representation against the adverse entries has been allowed and these entries have been expunged from his service record. Since the adverse entries were expunged the State Government by its order dated January 24, 1991 granted Selection Grade to the appellant with effect from the date he takes over charge. We fail to appreciate the view taken by the State Government. Once the adverse entries awarded to the appellant were expunged the appellant is entitled to Selection Grade with effect from January 1, 1986 the date on which he was eligible for grant of Selection Grade. We, accordingly, allow the appeal, set aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal and modify the order of the State Government dated January 24, 1991 and direct that the appellant shall be treated in Selection Grade with effect from January 1, 1986 and he will be entitled to all other consequential benefits with effect from that date. As regards appellant's further promotion, he will be considered for promotion in accordance with Rules."
Ventilating the grievances on the basis of the aforesaid judgement, the petitioner has represented his matter before the I.G. (Establishment), Lucknow but till date nor oder whatsoever has been passed in consideration of claim of the petitioner for grant of promotion w.e.f. 16.01.2016 and the same is still pending consideration.
Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing counsel submitted that no purpose will be served in keeping the writ petition pending. The writ petition may be disposed of with the direction to the competent authority to consider and pass appropriate reasoned and speaking order in the matter.
In view of the above, this writ petition is finally disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation to the respondent no.3 within a period of two weeks from today along with certified copy of the order. In case any such representation is filed by the petitioner before the respondent no. 4, he will consider the claim of the petitioner in the light of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of R.K. Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others (supra) and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of two months thereafter.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 Subodh/-