YOGINDRAPPA AMARAD Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE brief fact of the case in a nutshell is that:

(2.) MR . M. Chanda, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf of the petitioners argued that the ACP as well as the MACPS are to be considered from the date of re -musteration and it cannot be considered as a promotion. The learned counsel also further argued that in the WP(C) No. (SH) 256 of 2012 the learned Single Judge of this court has decided the matter in his judgment dated 10.04.2013 and discussed the principles elaborately and the said judgment was also upheld by the Division Bench of this court. Therefore, the same principles should be applied in this case.

(3.) AFTER hearing the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dated 10.04.2013 in WP(C) No. (SH) 256 of 2012 specially Para 6, 7 and 8 of the said judgment which is reproduced herein below: