R K GAUR Vs. GOVT OF NCT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, petition is taken up for final disposal. The petitioner has contended that he has been requesting the respondent to merge his post of Care Taker in the Ministerial staff of the equivalent post in the office of District & Sessions Judge and the respondent had taken more than 20 years in passing the routine order's under Rule 26(2) of the CCS(Pension) Rules,1972 in as much as though the petitioner Joined the service as a Caretaker in the office of District Judge on 31.3.1978, the relevant order has been passed on 11.10.1999.

(2.) It is relevant to state that in view of certain other proceedings initiated by the petitioner the matter in issue.had been referred to a Committee of Judges. The Committee of Judges examined the controversy in question and gave report on 21.3.2001. The operative portion of the order reads as under:

(3.) Mr.Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that petitioner has not been given full benefits of the report in as much as he is entitled to notional promotion when juniors were promoted in 1997. Mr.Gambhir, learned counsel for the respondents, however contended that the operative portion of the order has to be read with certain findings in the report of the Committee which are as under: