M P SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present writ petition the petitioner seeks for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to issue order of appointment in favour of the petitioner in the post of Director (Technical) for which post the petitioner was interviewed and was placed at serial No.1 in the panel.

(2.) The petitioner was promoted to the post of Chief Engineer in the Northern Coal Fields Ltd. in the year 1989. On 28.8.1990 the Central Bureau of Investigation registered a First Information Report against the petitioner on the allegation that he possessed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. A writ petition was filed by the petitioner in the Calcutta High Court which was registered as C.R.No.133349(W) of 1990 in which a direction was issued to the departmental authorities of the petitioner to issue charge sheet to the petitioner in accordance with law. However, on 25.2.1993 CBI submitted a report to the effect that after thorough investigation it could not be proved beyond all reasonable doubts that the petitioner possessed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. In the said report it was further stated that the case was not being sent for trial as the possession of disproportionate assets by the petitioner could not be proved beyond all reasonable doubt but there was material for departmental action and it was sent to his department to take departmental action for violation of the departmental rules.

(3.) After submission of such a report to the Special Judge, CBI, Dhanbad where the criminal case instituted against the petitioner was pending the Special Judge, CBI, Dhanbad accepted the report filed by the CBI and discharge the petitioner. Consequent thereto the Departmental Promotion Committee recommended the petitioner for further promotion to E-9 grade as Chief General Manager. The petitioner, thereafter became eligible for promotion to the next higher grade of Chief General Manager (Civil). However, due to the pendency of the proposed departmental action no promotion was given to the petitioner to the aforesaid post although he became eligible for such promotion and accordingly the petitioner again moved the Calcutta High Court in the pending writ petition. On the said application the Calcutta High Court by its order dated 10.6.1993 directed the Chairman-cum- Managing Director of Coal India Limited to intimate to the petitioner within 4 weeks as to who would be the Disciplinary Authority in the case of the petitioner in the Departmental Enquiry. On 9.7.1993 the Chairman-Cum-Managing Director of Coal India Limited appointed the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of Northern Coalfield Ltd. as the Disciplinary Authority for the proposed departmental enquiry to be initiated against the petitioner on the suggestion of the Central Bureau of Investigation. The Calcutta High Court thereafter disposed of the writ petition filed by the petitioner directing that the petitioner be promoted as Chief General Manager in terms of the report of the Departmental Promotion Committee subject to the outcome of the proposed departmental enquiry. The respondents were further given liberty to initiate departmental enquiry on the condition that the same would be completed within six months from the date of initiation of the same. It was also made clear that the petitioner would not be entitled to raise any issue to the effect that since the petitioner had been given promotion the allegations of misconduct, if any, would be treated as withdrawn or condoned. In pursuance of the order of the Calcutta High Court the petitioner was promoted to the rank/grade of Chief Genera Manager (Civil) by order dated 2.9.1993 and was posted in the Northern Coalfields Ltd.