STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PRABHAKAR SHIVAJI WANKHEDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Maharashtra has challenged the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, dated 2.11.2000 by which the Tribunal has granted deemed date of promotion to the respondent no.1. According to the Tribunal, the respondent no.1 ought to have been promoted as Police Head Constable / Assistant Police Sub Inspector w.e.f. 24.3.21989 and 1.10.1995 respectively, the dates on which, his juniors were promoted.

(2.) Smt. Dangre, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the petitioner / State submitted that the order of the Tribunal is erroneous in that it grants deemed date of promotions from dates when the petitioner could not have been promoted. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, we find that there is no doubt that the respondent no.1 who belongs Scheduled Caste Category has in fact been superseded in promotion to the post of Head Constable and Assistant Police Sub Inspector, by other persons who were junior to whom and whose names are at serial no.6, 12, 23, 28, 29, 36, 39, 40 and 41 in the seniority list. This position is not disputed on behalf of the petitioner / state. However, what is seriously disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the State is that the respondent could not have been granted deemed date of promotion from 24.3.1989 and 1.10.1995, respectively, i.e. the dates on which two other persons namely Ganesh Dalal and Shriram Jivtode, who were respondent no.3 and 4 before the Tribunal, were promoted. According to the learned Additional Government Pleader the aforesaid persons who were promoted, belonged to the Scheduled Tribe Category and the petitioner who was a Scheduled Caste candidate could not have been granted a deemed date of promotion with effect from the date these two persons were promoted. In other words, since the respondent no.1 belonged to Scheduled Caste Category, he could not have been promoted on the dates when the aforesaid persons belonging to Scheduled Tribe Category were promoted. This contention on behalf of the petitioner deserves acceptance and we hold that the Tribunal's order is erroneous only to the extent it grants deemed date of promotion to the respondent no.1, with effect from the date the two persons who belonged to Scheduled Tribe category were granted promotion as Head Constable and Assistant Police Sub Inspector. That however, does not resolve the dispute between the parties. It is an admitted position that the persons belonging to the Scheduled Caste and junior to the respondent no.1 have been promoted to the post of Police Head Constable and Assistant Police Sub Inspector.

(3.) Shri Moon, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1 submitted that such persons who were members of Scheduled Caste category and who were junior to the respondent no.1, were promoted earlier to him and they are the persons at serial no. 6, 12, 23, 28, 29, 36, 39, 40 and 41, in the seniority list. The Tribunal could have granted the deemed date from the date on which these persons superseded the respondent no.1 as Head Constable and Assistant Police Sub Inspector.