D.R. DAYAL Vs. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner (since deceased), now represented by his legal heirs, has preferred this writ petition claiming benefit of consequential reliefs of seniority and promotion pursuant to the judgment dated 28-8-1997 rendered by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.9569 of 1995 (Dayaram Dayal v State of M.P. and Another).

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that the petitioner was appointed as Civil Judge Junior Division (Class II) on 22-10-1985. He completed his probation on 22-5-1988 and thereafter was placed under suspension on 2-3-1990. The petitioner was served with charge sheet on 3-3-1990. On completion of departmental enquiry, the charges were found proved against him. Thereafter, the High Court imposed punishment of stoppage of two annual increments with cumulative effect pursuant to the resolution dated 27/28-4- 1991 passed in the meeting of the Full Court. The suspension was revoked on 7-8-1991. On account of certain adverse remarks in his ACRs for the period 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989- 90, 1991-92 and 1992-93 as also certain irregularities found by the inspecting Judge of the High Court the petitioner's case for promotion as Civil Judge Senior Division (Class I) was deferred. In the Full Court meeting held on 30-4-1993 and 1 st and 2nd May, 1993 the petitioner was not found fit for confirmation and his services were terminated after giving one month's salary in lieu of notice. The State Government issued the consequential order on 8-11-1993. Writ petition and LPA preferred by the petitioner came to be dismissed, however, SLP preferred by the petitioner was allowed by the Supreme Court under the judgment mentioned above and the petitioner was reinstated in service along with arrears of emoluments and all other consequential benefits.

(3.) Petitioner's claim for seniority and promotion is on the ground that in the seniority list of the Civil Judge Junior Division showing position as on 1-8-1988 his name find place at S.No.168 whereas his immediate juniors namely; Purannath Tembhurkar and Brijlal Tidke were at S.No.169 and 170, respectively and those two judicial officers were promoted on the post of Civil Judge Senior Division in October, 1993 and on the post of Chief Judicial Magistrate in 1996 and thereafter to the post of Additional District Judge in 1998 whereas the petitioner remained as Civil Judge Senior Division. It is the stand of the petitioner that the Supreme Court having reinstated him in service with all consequential benefits he should be placed at par with his immediate juniors.