JAGLAL PRASAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALOKE Chakrabarti, J. The petitioner after his initial appointment as a clerk was promoted on 3-2-1983 as Sales Supervisor Grade-I and was confirmed there on 16-7-1984. On 3-10-1986 the petitioner made representation for his fur ther promotion as he completed three years service and no other scheduled tribes candidate was available. Upon a fur ther representation by the petitioner the respondents sent reply dated 28-8-1990 stating that the promotion was strictly on merit and promotion committee upon consideration of all available cases, promoted the respondent No. 4, Sri K. K. Srivastava and therefore the contention of the petitioner that a junior had been promoted superseding the petitioner, does not enable the petitioner to obtain relief. The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the promotional order dated 10-7-1990 and for command ing the respondents to promote the petitioner as Sales/commercial Manager with seniority higher than the respondent No. 3.

(2.) TWO counter-affidavits and two rejoinder affidavits have been filed at dif ferent stages of the proceeding.

(3.) AFTER considering the respective contentions of the parties I find that the petitioner does not challenge that the criteria for promotion was only merit and promotion committee considered the case. Therefore when a promotion com mittee considered merit of all available candidates, including the petitioner and ultimately gave promotion to the respon dent No. 4, the petitioner cannot make a claim before the writ Court alleging super session. No material has been disclosed justifying an interference on the question of consideration by the promotion com mittee. It is also not the case of the petitioner that his case was not even con sidered and therefore it is not for this Court to enter into the consideration of the promotion committee as regards such promotion. No allegation of mala fide against the members of committee has been made justifying a consideration.