LAWS(UTN)-2010-8-102

DINESH VERMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On August 04, 2010
DINESH VERMA Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Dinesh Verma, the petitioner in person and Mr. U. K. Uniyal, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Shobhit Saharia, the learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 to 4.

(2.) The Tehri Hydro Development Corporation Ltd. issued an advertisement No.1/1995 inviting application for various posts. The petitioner applied for the post of Junior Executive (Law) and subsequently, was appointed on 11th July, 1997 as a Junior Executive (Law). After three years, the petitioner was promoted in E-1 grade in the D.P.C. of 2000 and after another three years, was promoted in the grade of E-2 in the D.P.C. of 2003. The petitioner made various representations to the authority alleging therein that based on the promotional policy issued by the respondents, he was liable to be promoted in E-1 grade w.e.f. 01.04.1998, i.e., after one year of his service from the date of his initial appointment and that he was liable to be promoted in E-2 grade w.e.f. 01.04.2001 and in E3 grade w.e.f. 01.04.2004. When his representations fell on deaf ears and no action was taken, the petitioner filed the present writ petition in the year 2006 praying that a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to promote the petitioner in E-1 grade w.e.f. 01.04.1998, in E-2 grade w.e.f. 01.04.2001 and in E-3 grade w.e.f. 01.04.2004 and that financial benefits in the aforesaid grades also be given.

(3.) The petitioner contended that based on the promotional policy, he was liable to be promoted in E-1 grade after one year of his service and that the respondents, instead of promoting him after one year, had promoted the petitioner arbitrarily in the year 2000. The petitioner further contended that the juniors to the petitioner, who were in the Supervisory grade S-4, were promoted earlier and the petitioner was not promoted and, consequently, the petitioner became junior to them. In support of his submission, the petitioner placed reliance upon the promotional policies dated 16th March, 1994, 15th January, 1996, 10th January, 2002 and 30th March, 2007.