STATE OF U P Vs. GAYA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through instant writ petition, the Petitioner (State) has sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 08.01.2010, passed by the State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim Petition No. 1602 of 2007, Gaya Ram v. state of U.P., thereby allowing the claim petition and directing the Petitioner to consider the opposite party No. 1 for promotion on the post of Chief Engineer, Level-II with effect from the date the same has been allowed to the officers junior to him and to pay all consequential benefit to him.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are that the opposite party No. 1 was appointed as Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department in the year 1972. Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer on 21.05.1981, subsequently to the post of Superintending Engineer on 07.11.1994. As per the U.P. Engineering Services (Public Works Department), Higher Services Rules, 1990, the next higher post to the post of Superintending Engineer is Chief Engineer, Level-II and the same is to be filled up through promotion from amongst the Superintending Engineers on the basis of merit. The opposite party No. 1 by means of order dated 16.01.1996 awarded the punishment of censure and the representation dated 02.03.1996 against the same was rejected vide order dated 19.07.1996. The State Government by means of another order dated 08.02.1996 awarded punishment of censure to the opposite party No. 1. The opposite party No. 1 was again awarded censure entry vide order dated 02.07.1996 for the year 1985-86 and 1986-87 and the representation against the same was also rejected vide order dated 20.06.1998. The adverse entry was awarded to the opposite party No. 1 vide order dated 25.08.1998 for the year 1998-99 and the representation preferred against the said order was rejected vide order dated 03.01.1999. The strict warning was awarded to the opposite party No. 1 vide order dated 20.05.1999 for the year 1999-2000 and for the year 1999-2000 special adverse entry was awarded on 26.06.1999, which was stayed vide order dated 23.04.2002. On 26.07.2004 an order was passed by which three punishments were awarded to the opposite party No. 1, namely, (i) stoppage of three increments for three years temporarily (ii) censure entry and (iii) integrity was withheld. On 16.09.2004, another order was passed by which strict warning was issued. The punishment order dated 26.07.2004 was challenged by filing Claim Petition No. 944 of 2005 before the learned Tribunal and the learned Tribunal stayed the same by means of order dated 17.01.2005. The Writ Petition No. 39311 of 1997 filed by the opposite party No. 1 for seeking promotion to the post of Chief Engineer Level-II was dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy before the Tribunal. The Petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.10.2007. The opposite party No. 1 filed a Claim Petition No. 1602 of 2007 for issuing a direction to the present Petitioner to promote him to the post of Chief Engineer, Level-II with effect from the date the same has been allowed to the officers junior to him with all consequential benefits.

(3.) The present Petitioner filed detailed counter affidavit/ written statement before the learned Tribunal and mentioned that the candidature of the opposite party No. 1 was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer, Level-II for the year 1998-99, 2002-2003 and 2007-2008, but he was not found fit for promotion due to adverse material against him.