UNION OF INDIA Vs. REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed by the Drugs Controller General (India) for and on behalf of the Union of India as against the order passed in O.A.465/01 dated 23.11.2001 by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The case stated by the second respondent herein before the Tribunal is as follows: The second respondent was appointed as Drugs Inspector in the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation,West Zone, Bombay against a vacancy reserved for Scheduled Tribe during the year 1977. He was appointed in the said post on the basis of the recommendation by the Union Public Service Commission. Thereafter, he was promoted as Assistant Drugs Controller on temporary basis against a single vacancy. However, he did not joint the promoted post due to some personal problems. Since the second respondent not joined in the promoted post in time, the said appointment was cancelled by order dated 30.6.92 (Vide Order No.X.12016/6/89-D (DMS & PFA)) Subsequently, a Departmental Promotion Meeting was held in April 1995. Thereafter, the second respondent was promoted as Assistant Drugs Controller against a vacancy based on reservation. The said promotion was given to him on ad hoc basis and the concerned authority asked him to join duty on 24.2.1995. As per the instructions issued in the appointment order, he joined duty at New Delhi. Later, he was transferred to Hyderabad. Then he was again transferred to China from Hyderabad on 23.6.98 and joined duty at China on 29.6.98. As he was continuing in the promoted post only on ad hoc basis, he submitted a representation dated 17.11.98 to the concerned authority for regularising his appointment. Thereafter, he issued a legal notice to the concerned authority on 13.9.2000. Since he did not receive any response from the concerned authority, he moved before the Tribunal by filing O.A.1278/2000 wherein he was seeking the relief of confirmation in the post of Assistant Drugs Controller on the basis of 1995 roster. The said Application was disposed of by an order dated 2.11.2000 with a direction to the concerned authority to dispose of the representation of the second respondent dated 17.11.1998 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. However, the concerned authority disposed of the said representation by a communication dated 12.4.2001 in F.No.A.12016/6/94-D. Aggrieved over the said communication issued to him, the second respondent has filed O.A.465/2001 before the Tribunal wherein he sought for the relief of confirmation of his promotion in the post of Assistant Drugs Controller from the date of his promotion (order in No.A.12016/4/94-D) dated 28.6.95 and also he sought for the relief of quashing the communication dated 12.4.2001.

(3.) The Tribunal after hearing the arguments advanced by either side,passed the following Order: