RAJKUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition praying for the following reliefs:-

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as peon with the respondent Board. While working as Nakedar he was promoted to the post of Mandi Inspector GradeII, subject to approval of the Director of Mandi. However, by the time the Director declined to approve the said promotion, whereas the petitioner had already worked for more than two years on such post, i.e. from 1/11/1975 to 23/12/1977. The petitioner being aggrieved by the refusal of the Director of Mandi to approve his promotion for want of rules filed a writ petition before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. On constitution of the State Administrative Tribunal, the said petition was transferred and registered as Transfer Application No.1372/1988. The said Transfer Application was finally decided in favour of the petitioner vide order dtd. 27/7/1993 holding that his case would be considered by the respondents for promotion to the post of Mandi Inspector, Grade-II and in case the petitioner is found fit, he would be entitled to be placed over and above his juniors in the gradation list. The petitioner submits that despite there being a very clear order in addition to his repeated representations, he was promoted to the post of Mandi Inspector, Grade-II vide order dtd. 11/12/1996 and not prior to that. Moreover, the petitioner was promoted to the said post very arbitrarily w. e. f. 27/7/1993 only, i.e. the date of order of the learned Tribunal, whereas there was a clear direction in the Tribunal's order that in addition to granting all consequential benefits, in case of being found fit the petitioner would be entitled for seniority over and above his juniors. The petitioner being aggrieved of the above, preferred many representations for being given promotion w.e.f. 10/10/1980, i.e. from when his juniors have been promoted and therefore, vide order dtd. 14/1/2002 he was given promotion to the post of Mandi Inspector, Grade-II w. e. f 10/10/1980 and was accordingly placed in the gradation list. The petitioner was further placed and treated as on the promoted post of Secretary, Mandi Board and continued to work there till his retirement w. e. f. 31/5/2004. The petitioner subsequent to his retirement in place of receiving his retrial benefits was highly shocked to receive the order dtd. 28/6/2005 by which the respondents cancelled the order dtd. 14/1/2002 awarding promotion to the petitioner w.e.f. 10/10/1980. The same was challenged by the petitioner before this Court by filing a writ petition bearing W.P. No.3461/2005. The said writ petition was finally disposed of by this Court vide order dtd. 12/7/2010, by which the order dtd. 28/6/2005 was quashed and the respondents were directed to decide the representation of the petitioner within a stipulated period of six weeks. In light of the said observation, the petitioner made a fresh representation dtd. 24/7/2010, but the same has been rejected by the respondents vide order dtd. 18/8/2010 (Annexure P/1). Hence, this petition has been filed by the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dtd. 18/8/2010 (Annexure P/1) is bad in law. The respondents ought to have appreciated that after being promoted to the post of Secretary Grade-IV w. e. f. 10/10/1980 vide order dtd. 14/1/2002, the petitioner could not have been reverted to the lower post without giving any opportunity of hearing. The respondents ought to have appreciated that there was no illegality in giving the fruits of the post of Secretary Grade-IV w.e.f. 10/10/1980 to the petitioner, as a number of junior employees had already been given the said benefits from that very date. The respondents ought to have appreciated that in view of the direction given by the Tribunal vide order dtd. 27/7/1993, the petitioner was placed on the post of Mandi Inspector after duly being considered by the authorities and therefore, the respondents should not have cancelled such order while deciding the representation of the persons holding junior position in the gradation list. The respondents ought to have appreciated that vide order dtd. 27/7/1993 (Annexure P/2) while directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for absorption on the post of Mandi Inspector Grade-II, the learned Tribunal was pleased to hold that the petitioner in case of being found fit, would be given seniority above his juniors and he would be entitled for all the consequential benefits, meaning thereby that there was no scope to interpret that the petitioner's absorption from 10/10/1980 was not proper. The respondents ought to have appreciated that the order dtd. 14/1/2002 was passed by a duly competent authority under the law and the same could not have been rejected. Therefore, the writ petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order be set aside. Reliance has been placed on the judgment rendered by the High Court of M.P. in the matter of Kamal Krishna Dwivedi vs State of M.P. and others, passed in WP No.18868/2014.