UNION OF INDIA Vs. HALDHAR PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the writ petitions are taken up together as they arise out of the very same order dated 17.11.2011 passed in O.A. No.2437/2011 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi.

(2.) DR Haldhar Prasad was aggrieved by the fact that he was not granted promotion to Senior Administrative Grade inasmuch as he was found unfit on account of below benchmark ACRs in the DPC held in September, 2009. Subsequently the below benchmark ACRs were communicated and Dr Prasad submitted a representation against the same. The representation was considered and it was decided by the competent authority (GM, Eastern Railway) to upgrade certain gradings, the details whereof are as follows:- Year ending Earlier Revised Grading March 2005 I Good Very Good March 2005 II Good No change March 2006 Good Very Good March 2007 I Good Very Good

(3.) THE fact of the matter is that the below benchmark ACRs had not been communicated to the said Dr Prasad. Consequently, the Tribunal, after considering the rival contentions of the parties allowed the O.A. of Dr Prasad and directed the petitioner herein to hold a review DPC in respect of the year 2009 to consider the applicant for promotion to the post of Senior Administrative Grade and if the recommendations of the review DPC were that the said Dr Prasad was fit, he may be promoted from the date his immediate junior was promoted. The Tribunal also directed that Dr Prasad would not be entitled to actual wages but his pay would be notionally fixed on the promotional post. We may point out that Dr Prasad has filed his writ petition in respect of this part of the order whereby he was given notional pay and not actual wages.