ASHOK Vs. ADDITIONAL DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition is filed by the Petitioner challenging the judgment and order dtd. 14/12/2016 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad in Appeal No. DB/Appeal/Cell/100/2015. The learned Additional Divisional Commissioner, by impugned judgment and order confirmed the order dtd. 18/4/2015 passed by Respondent No. 2/ Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Latur. Promotion order of Respondent No. 3 to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer is thereby challenged. However, by efflux of time, the Petitioner so also the Respondent No. 3 both have retired. A prayer clause, therefore, is now added seeking deemed date of promotion to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer with all consequential benefits including fixation of pay etc.

(2.) The facts in short as stated in the Petition are that on 19/6/1984, the Petitioner came to be appointed as Junior Assistant with Zilla Parishad. On 12/1/1999, he came to be promoted to the post of Senior Assistant by giving deemed date as 14/7/1988. He was thereafter promoted as Superintendent on 3/4/2000. The said order was challenged by one Suryabhan Pawar claiming that he was entitled to get promotion to the post of Superintendent. His appeal came to be allowed and thus, he was promoted to the post of Superintendent. Petitioner, therefore, filed Appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Auranbabad, wherein promotion of Mr. Pawar came to be set aside. The matter was remanded back to the Zilla Parishad. Zilla Parishad reverted the Petitioner by promoting Mr. Pawar. Petitioner, therefore, filed Appeal before the Divisional Commissioner. However, the same came to be rejected on 25/2/2003. The Petitioner approached the State Government by filing revision. Said revision came to be allowed by order dtd. 10/11/2004. Said decision came to be challenged by Mr. Suryabhan Pawar by filing Writ Petition No. 2746/2005. This Court, again remanded the matter to Zilla Parishad. However, again Mr. Pawar came to be appointed on the post of Superintendent. In the next round again, the order in respect of the Petitioner was reversed. It is thus Petitioner is before this Court. As stated above, now the Petitioner is seeking only deemed date of promotion with consequential benefits. As on today, there is no challenge to the promotion of either Mr. Pawar or present Respondent No. 3.

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr. Patil vehemently argued that when the Petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant he was at serial number 164 in the seniority list whereas Mr. Pawar was at serial number 295. After promotion to the post of Senior Assistant, the Petitioner was at serial number 32 whereas Mr. Pawar was at serial number 34. He thus submits that when Mr. Pawar was admittedly junior to the Petitioner as per the record, there was no question of promoting him prior to the Petitioner. The Petitioner was therefore rightly promoted. The authorities including the appellate authorities however, committed mistake by accepting the case of Mr. Pawar and denying promotion to the present Petitioner. He submits that even date of appointment of present Petitioner is prior to the date of appointment of Mr. Pawar. He thus submits that the Petition deserves to be allowed.