A.S. GEETHANJALI Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though there is a delay of 13 days in filing the appeal, we have heard Sri. S.B. Mukkannappa, learned Counsel for the appellant and Smt. H.R. Renuka, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on merits of the case with their consent.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that, the appellant was appointed as Assistant Statistical Officer vide order dtd. 27/3/2006. It is stated that disciplinary proceeding was initiated against her and 'sealed cover procedure' was adopted in her case while promoting her fellow employees. The disciplinary proceeding was concluded, finding that the appellant was guilty of causing loss of Rs.6,000.00 in purchase of certain materials and the said amount was recovered from four of the employees who were held responsible under the domestic enquiry. After conclusion of the domestic enquiry and recovery of the amount as aforesaid, the appellant was promoted to the higher cadre i.e., Assistant Statistical Officer, Class-II on 24/12/2011.

(3.) The grievance of the appellant is that she should have been considered for promotion with effect from 22/6/2011 on par with her fellow employees who got promoted during the pendency of the domestic enquiry initiated against her. Therefore, a representation was filed to consider her request for restoration of her seniority on par with her fellow employees who were much lower in ranking in the seniority list, but her request was turned down by issuing an endorsement dtd. 16/3/2013 which was assailed by the appellant by filing the writ petition.