RANJAN BORTHAKUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved with the reversion order dated 29.8.2012, letter dated 26.10.2012, order dated 30.10.2012 and the promotion order dated 10.10.2012 the applicant has approached this Tribunal with the following relief: - -

(2.) MR . M. Chanda, learned Counsel for the applicant assisted by Mr. S. Nath, learned Counsel appeared and submitted that the promotion order dated 10.10.2012 ignoring the applicant is totally arbitrary, unjust, unfair and not in accordance with the provisions of law. Learned Counsel invited our attention to the seniority list of Inspector of Posts in Assam Circle as on 1.7.2006. In the said list, the name of the applicant figured at Sl. No. 61, whereas S/Shri Manish Kumar (65), Manish Kumar (105), Vivek Vimal, Tankeswar Shukla and Diwakar Kumar figured at 65, 67, 69, 70 and 73 respectively and those juniors were promoted as ASPO on regular basis without considering the case of the applicant. Thus, the department did not adhere to the seniority list and promoted juniors of the applicant.

(3.) IN reply to that, learned Counsel for the applicant invited our attention to the written statement and stated that disciplinary action is contemplated against the applicant and even charges have not been issued to the applicant. As such, action of the official respondents is not in conformity with the Rule 11(4)(ii) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, which reads as under: -