ARJUN LAL Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Shri Aijun Lal, being aggrieved against his supersession and non-promotion to the post of Accounts Officer from the post of Accountant with effect from the date his juniours were promoted, has prayed for the directions from this Court to the respondent to the effect that they should promote the petitioner forthwith to the post of Accounts Officer with effect from the date the persons junior to him were promoted and further for the grant of consequentioal benefits.

(2.) The petitioner, who initially joined as the Lower Division Clerk with the respondent, after getting certain promotions, was ultimately promoted to the post of Accountant in the scale ofpayofRs.500-20-700-EB-25-900. There is no dispute that the next channel of promotion from the grade of Accountant is to the grade of Accounts Officer. Further, there is no dispute that the petitioner on 13.12.1989, when the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short "DPC") was held for promotion to the post of Accounts Officer was fully eligible to be considered for promotion to the above psot and was also in the field of choice along with two juniors- namely Shri Kanhiya Lal and Shri S.S. Maurya and the DPC as such considered the case of the petitioner along with other two juniors. However, the recommendations of the DPC as regards the petitioner were put in a sealed cover whereas his two juniors namely Kanhiya Lal and shri S.S. Maurya, were promoted as Accounts Officer in supersession of the petitioner vide order No. 5251 dated 22.12.1989, on officiating basis. Being aggrieved against this supersession and adopting sealed cover procedure in this respect by the petitioner, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) The stand of the respondent, in substance, is that no doubt the case of the petitioner was considered by the DPC held on 13.12.1989 for the purpose of promotion to the post of Accounts Officer but on account of the adverse vigilance report against the petitioner and after taking into consideration his performance report for the last 5 years, DPC recommended that its findings with regard to the suitability of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Accounts Officer be kept in a sealed cover and it was only for this reason that the petitioner was not promoted to the post of Accounts Officer with the other persons junior to him. The Disciplinary Authority had passed an order dated 30.9.1988 for initiating major penalty proceedings against the petitioner because the petitioner was involved in a case in which other officers, namely, Shri Vijay Kumar (Executive Enginneer), Shri R.K. Garg (Assistant Engineer), Shri A.K. Singhal (JE), Shri I.J. Mehta (JE) and Shri N.J. Pillai (JE), were also involved. The charges against these officers, including the petitioner, were for using sub-standard material in the work of construction in 192 SFS Houses at Kishan Garh, Pocket C, Gr. 1. Since the petitioner was drawing pay of Rs.2,825.00 and was involved in a case, therefore the case of the petitioner was sent to CVC on 18.10.1988 for advice and the advice of CVC was received on 9.5.1989. Moreover the case was investigated by CBI and all the records were seized by CBI. Since the final draft of the charge sheet had been received form CBI on 11.4.1990 and the fair charge sheet had been issued in due course. It was on account of these reasons that the sealed cover procedure was adopted in the case of the petitioner and he could not be promoted.