ALOK CHANDRAVANSHI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 14 petitioners, who are presently working on various posts in Chhattisgarh State Industrial Development Corporation (C.S.I.D.C.) have filed this writ petition for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation (M.P.F.C.) for considering their cases for promotion to the next higher post.

(2.) The brief facts are that prior to the re-organization of the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh, the petitioners were working with the Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation. After the re-organization and bifurcation of the States, the M.P.F.C. continued in the State of Madhya Pradesh but in the State of Chhattisgarh, the C.S.I.D.C. came into existence. As an effect of the reorganisation, various employees including the petitioners have been posted in the State of Chhattisgarh because of their allocation. The case of petitioners is that the bifurcation of the M.P.F.C. is yet to complete and the allocation of the employees of M.P.F.C. to C.S.I.D.C. in Chhattisgarh is yet to attain the finality as the matter of their allocation is still pending with the committee constituted by the Central Government, but in the meanwhile, the M.P.F.C. is holding DPC for promotion of its employees, which are in the zone of consideration, to the higher cadre but in this process of promotion, the employees, who are presently working under M.P.F.C. are being considered and the employees working with C.S.I.D.C. are not being considered. Therefore, if, after finalization of the process of bifurcation and allocation, these petitioners or any one of them are finally allocated to the State of Madhya Pradesh with the M.P.F.C they shall be put to a disadvantageous position because many similarly placed co-employees working with the M.P.F.C. would enjoy the promotional post and they shall have to work on their respective posts presently held by them.

(3.) The M.P.F.C. (respondent No. 6 herein) has filed its return. It is submitted by the M.P.F.C. that out of 14 persons, who have exercised their option to serve in the State of Chhattisgarh, as many as 8 of them were already serving/posted in State of Chhattisgarh even before its formation. Out of the remaining 6 persons, while 5 persons were posted in State of Chhattisgarh before the cut off date (31-3-2003) pursuant to their option, the remaining one was transferred to Chhattisgarh pursuant to the allocation made effective from 1-4-2003. It is further submitted that some of the petitioners, who had earlier given their options for Chhattisgarh, tried to revoke their options and return to the State of Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner Nos. 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13 and 14 belong to this category. Out of the aforesaid 7 employees all except the petitioner No. 4 tried to withdraw their options by directly representing to the Kapoor Committee which is a committee constituted by the Government of India to resolve the disputes/grievances of the affected employees. The case of petitioner No. 4 has also been forwarded to the Kapoor Committee on the basis of an order passed by the Indore Bench of High Court of Madhya Pradesh in W.P. No. 966 of 2003. It has also been submitted that the Government of India is yet to take a final decision in this matter after recommendations of the Kapoor Committee, and since the business/work of the M.P.F.C. was being adversely affected because of the vacancies and it needed best personnels available for filing up of the vacant post, it decided to fill up the said posts by promotions on the basis of DPC recommendations in accordance with Rules. It is further submitted that the petitioners will not be eligible for consideration to the next higher post in M.P. Financial Corporation until they are finally allocated and transferred to the M.P.F.C. by the Government of India on the basis of the recommendations of the Kapoor Committee. Finally respondent No. 6 has given an undertaking in Para 1.6 of their return which is as follows: