S C SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We fully agree with the reasoning of the learned Tribunal. The promotions effected are not regular promotions but adhoc promotions made as stop- gap arrangement, as already pointed out above. As and when promotions are made on regular basis and backlog of vacancies is not filled year-wise and in conformity with the DP&T's OM dated 10th April, 1989 it would always be open for the petitioners to challenge such an action of the respondents. The question as to whether the eligibility list for the purpose of promotion is to be prepared on the basis of the date of completing the approved service is not required to be gone into in these proceedings as this issue neither ripened nor was the subject matter of OA. Therefore, it is not necessary to express any opinion at this stage on this issue. As and when the promotions are made on regular basis and the petitioners feel aggrieved against the methodology and procedure adopted by the official respondents in ignoring their claims, they would be at liberty to approach the learned Tribunal by filing appropriate OA questioning such an action of the respondents which would be dealt with by the learned Tribunal on its own merit. This liberty is granted. It is stated at the cost of repetition that in the present case, cause of action related to the threatened reversion of the petitioners from the promoted posts to which they were promoted on adhoc basis on their seniors becoming eligible for promotion and when they were given promotion on adhoc basis.

(2.) The consequence of the aforesaid discussion is that subject to grant of liberty as aforementioned, these writ petitions fail and are hereby dismissed.

(3.) There shall, however, be no order as to costs.