STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BHALESHKUMAR ALKHAJI ASARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard learned Government Pleader Ms. Manisha Lavkumar assisted by learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Tirthraj Pandya appearing for the appellant and learned advocate Mr. Jit Patel appearing for the respondent, APPEAL is ADMITTED.

(2.) That, the undisputed facts emerging from the record of the case are as follows:

(3.) Learned Government Pleader Ms. Manisha Lavkumar assisted by learned AGP Mr. Tirthraj Pandya appearing for the applicant-State would submit that the facts in the case of K.V. Jankiraman (Supra) are different to the facts of the present case. She would submit that it is an undisputed fact that though the name of the respondent was included in the select list, no actual promotion was granted until 9/6/2016 vide Notification No. GAS-2015-1500-G.1. She would submit that the case of the respondent was not considered because of the suspension of the respondent after having found serious charges of corruption against the respondent. She would further submit that considering the decision of K.V. Jankiraman (Supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. R.S. Sharma reported in (2000) 4 SCC 394 has held that the authority can refuse to promote any person if during the interregnum period i.e. from the date of DPC and actual date of promotion, the authority finds something adverse against an employee. By taking us through the Government Resolution No. SLT-1080-895-C-2 dtd. 23/9/1981 of the General Administration Department of Government of Gujarat, she would submit that it is made clear that though the name of an employee is included in the select list, only on that ground he or she shall not be promoted, if any criminal proceedings are pending against the said employee. Similar was the clause considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R.S. Sharma (Supra). She, therefore, would submit that the implementation, operation and execution of the judgment dtd. 26/11/2021 delivered by the learned Single Judge be stayed pending the final disposal of the Letters Patent Appeal.