R K MEHRA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra Court appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 27-11-2009 whereby the writ petition preferred by respondent No. 2 has been allowed.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to the instant writ appeal stated in brief are that respondent No. 2 filed the writ petition inter alia on the averments that he was initially appointed on 14-11-1984 as Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department and was thereafter promoted to the post of Executive Engineer vide order dated 19-4-2001. In the gradation list of Executive Engineer as on 1-4-2004, name of respondent No. 2 appears at serial No. Ill whereas name of the appellant appears at serial No. 112. At the relevant time, two Departmental Enquiries were pending against respondent No. 2. However, vide order dated 27-6-2005, the appellant was promoted on the post of Superintending Engineer and respondent No. 2 was superseded. After conclusion of the Departmental Enquiries, the respondent No. 2 submitted a representation dated 26-9-2005, in which it was stated that since the respondent No. 2 has been exonerated in the Departmental Enquiries, therefore, he should be promoted on the post of Superintending Engineer. However, respondent No. 2 learnt that the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee which were kept in the sealed cover on account of pendency of Departmental Enquiries of respondent No. 2 were not opened wherein it was found that respondent No. 2 could not attain the bench mark grade fixed by the Departmental Promotion Committee and was not found fit for promotion. In the aforesaid factual matrix, the respondent No. 2 sought a direction commanding respondent No. 1 to promote him on the post of Superintending Engineer with effect from 27-6-2005 with all consequential benefits.

(3.) Respondent No. 1 filed a return in which inter alia it was stated that meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee was convened on 10-11-2003 and the cases of eligible candidates coming within the zone of consideration were considered for promotion. Appellant herein was found fit for promotion on the post of Superintending Engineer. Therefore, an order dated 27-6-2005 has been issued promoting appellant to the post of Superintending Engineer and the recommendation made by the Departmental Promotion Committee in respect of respondent No. 2 were kept in sealed cover as two Departmental Enquiries were pending against him. However, when the sealed cover was opened, it was found that respondent No. 2 has not been found fit for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer. It has further been stated that respondent No. 2 has already been promoted on the post of Superintending Engineer vide order dated 10-7-2006. Proceedings of the minutes of the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee held on 10-11-2003 were also annexed with the return.