D S PANWAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . By the present petition the petitioner has sought for his promotion to the post of Second-in-Command w.e.f. 17/2/1996.

(2.) . The petitioner was promoted as Company Commander in the year 1980 and way promoted to the post of Deputy Commandant on 9/10/1991. The next promotion post of the petitioner was to the grade of Second-in-Command in the pay scale of Rs.4,100.00-5,300.00. The case of the petitioner for promotion to the said grade was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee CW.1638/1996. alongwith other eligible candidates. However, in the order of promotion dated 17/2/1996 the name of the petitioner was not included whereas the names of other person including those impleaded as private respondents in the present petition were included. Accordingly being aggrieved by the said order of promotion dated 17/2/1996 the petitioner preferred this petition.

(3.) . It was contended by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner had all the eligibility criteria for his promotion from the post of Deputy Commandant to Second-in-Command and therefore, he should have been promoted as he fulfilled all the requirements laid down for such promotion. It was also submitted by him that in case the petitioner was not promoted by the Departmental Promotion Committee on the ground that he was down-graded in his confidential reports then such reports whereby the petitioner was down graded could not have been considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee without communicating the same to the petitioner. In support of the said contention the counsel relied upon the decision of U.P.Jal Nigam & Others Vs. Prabhat Chandra Jain & Others; (1996) 2 SCC 363. It was also submitted that P.K.Gautam respondent No.17 herein was not only Junior to the petitioner but his name was also not recommended by the DPC for promotion but that the said respondent was at still piomoted by the respondent to the grade to Second-in-Command which is highly discriminatory.