V G PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned advocate Shri Paresh Upadhyay on behalf of petitioner and learned AGP Prasant Markand appearing on behalf of respondent.

(2.) The petitioner joined the services of the Government as Accounts Officer Class- II in the year 1982. In August, 1987, the petitioner was appointed direct recruit Accounts Officer Class-I. On 17th July, 2001, persons junior to the petitioner are promoted on the post of Deputy Director (Accounts), including Shri V.M.Shah who is at Sr.No. 166 in the seniority list whereas the petitioner is at Sr.No. 163 in the said list. At the time of said promotion, one departmental inquiry was pending against the petitioner and therefore, recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee was kept in sealed cover. On 25th February, 2004, more officers, junior to the petitioner, were promoted on the post of Deputy Director (Accounts). At that time, one Shri S.V.Trivedi, who was at Sr.No.205 in the seniority list, was also superseded because of pendency of departmental inquiry against him. The departmental inquiry against Shri S. V. Trivedi was concluded by imposing minor punishment of censure vide order dated 20th October, 2002. On 11th November, 2004. the departmental inquiry initiated against the petitioner was culminated into minor punishment of withholding of one increment without future effect. On 30th August, 2005, upon conclusion of the departmental inquiry against the petitioner as well as Shri Trivedi, the Government released the promotion on both of them. On 30th September, 2005, the petitioner made representation that the petitioner is entitled to get deemed date since the departmental inquiry, which was the reason for not releasing promotion of the petitioner alongwith his junior, had culminated into minor punishment of withholding of one increment. Same representation is also made by Shri S. V. Trivedi claiming deemed date of promotion against his immediate junior with effect from 25th February, 2004. The claim of Shri Trivedi was accepted and deemed date promotion as claimed by him was granted. On 5th September, 2006, the claim of the petitioner for deemed date of promotion was rejected without assigning any reason by the State Government.

(3.) Learned advocate Shri Paresh Upadhyay submitted that such rejection of the claim of deemed date of the petitioner is absolutely illegal and discriminatory and. therefore, further representation was made by the petitioner. Finance Department has accepted the claim of the petitioner as just and legal and therefore, strong recommendations are also made to General Administration Department that the petitioner should be granted deemed date promotion. However, on 31st July, 2007, the General Administration Department has rejected the claim of the petitioner.