BENEDICT TIGGA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, by this petition, seeks quashing of the order dated 23-6-2004 (Annexure P/1) whereby and whereunder the respondents No. 7, 8 and 9 have been promoted to the post of District Commandant (home guards).

(2.) THE indisputable facts, in nutshell, are that the petitioner along with the respondents No. 7 to 9 were working as Company Commandant (home guards). In the seniority list as on 1-4-2003 respondents No. 8 and 9 were shown as juniors to the petitioner and the respondent No. 7 was shown as senior to the petitioner. THE petitioner along with the respondents No. 7 to 9 were considered for promotion in the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short, "DPC") held on 26-5-2004 and the names of the respondents No. 7 to 9 were recommended for promotion. In the case of the petitioner, it was observed that though the petitioner was graded as "B" in the annual confidential report of the year 2003, but the DPC graded him as "C" without assigning any reason. Accordingly, the respondents No. 7 to 9 were found more suitable for promotion. THE criteria of the promotion was seniority-cum- suitability.

(3.) SHRI V.V.S. Murthy, learned Dy. Advocate General appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 6/State, per contra, would submit that there was adverse remark against the petitioner in the annual confidential report of the year 2003 which was communicated to him vide letter dated 6-6- 2003 (Annexure R/2). There were certain criminal cases also pending against the petitioner in various courts of law. The petitioner overstayed on medical leave and as such violated the conditions of Rule 7 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services Conduct Rules 1963. It was further contended that a Departmental Enquiry was initiated against the petitioner against alleged mis-conduct and a charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner on 7-11-2003 on several allegations of irregularities, in-subordination etc.