C N RAVAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, aged 61 years, a retired Postal Assistant, is before this Court being aggrieved by judgment and order dated 29.4.2011 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench in O.A. No.57 of 2010, by which the Hon ble Tribunal was pleased to dismiss the Original Application.

(2.) HEARD learned advocate Mr.M.S.Rao for the petitioner. Learned advocate for the petitioner invited attention of the Court to the controversy involved in the matter. The present petitioner was serving as a Postal Assistant and in the year 2004, an order came to be issued on 27.5.2004, a copy of which is produced at Page-92. The order is issued by the Chief Post Master General, Ahmedabad City Division. The order pertains to, placement of Postal Assistants in higher scale of BCR (Bi-Annual Cadre Review) in Ahmedabad City Division. The opening part of the order reads as under :

(3.) LEARNED advocate for the petitioner then invited attention of the Court to the method and manner in which the case of the petitioner is dealt by the Department. This is clear from the office noting, a copy of which is available at Page-90 and 91. Typed version of that is available at Page-91(A) and 91(B). The office noting is to the effect that, this is regarding for promotion to BCR cadre year 2004. List of 41 - (forty one) officials are sent to CO for consideration in BCR. Out of them, 33 - (thirty three) officials recommended by DPC for their placement on higher scale of BCR as per list enclosed. If agree, we may issue order for their placement to next higher grade. There are adverse remark against following two officials who are promoted in BCR cadre year 2004.