PURAN DAS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are interlinked and are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Appellant challenges the judgments of a Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court at Shimla holding that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of promotion from the date his juniors were granted promotion. The appellants case (supra) was that he was deprived of the opportunity of acquiring the requisite qualification for promotion as he was initially placed under suspension and subsequently removed from service. After reinstatement he qualified at the requisite tests and on the basis of such qualification he shall be deemed to have acquired the right to be considered along with his juniors when the consideration was made.

(3.) The factual background is as follows :- Appellant joined the Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force as a Constable on 7-1-1967. In 1969 he was promoted as Head Constable. On 11-9-1973 he was suspended from service as a criminal case was registered against him. He was subsequently acquitted in that criminal case. During the period of suspension, appellant was directed to stay at Taradevi and not to leave the Headquarters. On 25-10-1974 his application for station leave was rejected and he was directed to stay at Taradevi. Notice was given to him for proposing disciplinary action for not reporting at Taradevi. After enquiry the appellant was held guilty of charge of deserting the services during the period of suspension. On 14-2-1976 show-cause notice was issued to the appellant to show-cause as to why the punishment of removal from service shall not be imposed upon him. By order dated 1-3-1976, the appellant was ordered to be removed from service. By order dated 24-4-1976 the appeal was rejected by the appellate authority. The appellant filed Civil Writ Petition No. 324/1976 in the High Court praying for the quashing of the aforesaid order of removal from service. As noted above, appellant was acquitted in the criminal case by judgment dated 31-5-1979. The High Court allowed the writ petition by order dated 4-1-1983 and directed that all consequential reliefs be given to the appellant. On 8-2-1983, an order was passed to reinstate the appellant in service with all consequential reliefs with arrears of salary. In March, 1984 the appellant qualified Radio Operator Grade II test and in June 1986 he qualified in the Grade I test. He became eligible for departmental promotion test i.e. D test subsequently. Representation was made by the appellant to the concerned authorities for granting relief in terms of the High Courts orders. The same was not accepted by the concerned authorities. The appellant again filed the C.W.P. No.16/1987 in the High Court for grant of consequential reliefs. On 18-9-1987 during the pendency of the writ petition respondents 5 to 9 were promoted. According to the appellant they were junior in service to the appellant. Civil Writ Petition No. 562/87 was filed by the appellant challenging promotion given to respondents 5 to 9. The High Court partly allowed CWP No. 562/87, declining the claim of promotion from the date his juniors were promoted on the basis that under the relevant rules the appellant had qualified at the test in 1986 only. Appellant had highlighted that some of the persons who were granted promotion had not qualified in all the tests and the appellant was prevented from qualifying at the test because he was placed under suspension and/or dismissed. The High Court held that since the appellant did not possess requisite qualification for promotion at the time of consideration for promotion, his claim for promotion from the date his juniors were granted promotion cannot be accepted. In CWP No.16 of 1987, the High Court granted reliefs with which the present appeals have no direct nexus. But the prayer for promotion from earlier point of time was rejected. In CWP No. 562 of 1987 that was the essential prayer, as the relief sought for was promotion from the date his juniors were given promotion.