NIHAL CHANDRA JAIN Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner before this Court has filed this present writ petition for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of U.D.T., in terms of Circular of the State Government dated 6/1/1968 and keeping in view the judgment delivered in the case of Sultan Khan Qureshi Vs. State of M.P. (W.P.No. 6176 / 2003).

(2.) The contention of the petitioner is that he was appointed as lower Division Teacher / Asstt. Teacher on 28/7/1955 and was confirmed to the post of Asstt. Teacher / LDT on 28/7/1955. Petitioner has further stated that he has cleared BTI Examination in the year 1962 and has also obtained a degree of graduation in the year 1969. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards a policy framed by the State Government dated 6/1/1978 in the matter of promotion from the post of Asstt. Teacher / LDT to the post of UDT and the same provides that 5 years experience on the post of LDT including B.Ed., / BTI and a Graduation Degree as a qualification for promotion. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued before this court that the petitioner became eligible in the year 1966 itself as he has completed 5 years of service, keeping in view the judgment delivered in the case of Muralidhar Neema Vs. State of M.P. And others (T.A.No. 166 / 1988) and, therefore, the action of the respondent in denying the benefit of retrospective promotion to the petitioner and the order rejecting the petitioner's case dated 22/2/2012 deserves to be set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out before this court that the details mentioned in the order dated 22/2/2012 (Annexure R/1) are factually incorrect and keeping in view the judgment delivered in the case of Sultan Khan Qureshi Vs. State of M.P. (W.P.No. 6176 / 2003), the petitioner is also entitled for retrospective promotion.

(3.) A reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent State and the stand of the State Government is that the petitioner is not entitled for promotion with retrospective effect. It has also been stated t hat the petitioner was initially appointed in Ujjain Division as Asst. Teacher and he has not disclosed the fact of his transfer to Indore and seniority of LDT / Asstt. Teacher is maintained at Divisional level and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief, as granted by this Court in the case of Sultan Khan Qureshi Vs. State of M.P. (W.P.No. 6176 / 2003). The respondents have also stated that they have rejected petitioner's application for grant of promotion by passing a speaking order.