B.G. SHRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Bhopal Bench, Bhopal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') vide its order dated 10.08.1999 decided two cases filed by the petitioner, who was the applicant before it. The number of the first case is T.A. No. 590/88 and the other case is O.A. No. 78/89. The petitioner by this writ petition preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has challenged the pregnability of the order passed in transferred Application No. 590/88. Needless to state that originally the petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ petition which was registered as Misc. Petition No. 1594/88 and was transferred to the tribunal on its establishment.

(2.) In the writ petition the case of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed on the post of Lower Division Clerk in the year 1951 and with the passage of time he secured certain promotions and was finally promoted to the post of 'Section Officer' vide order dated 22.9.1978. Thereafter he was confirmed on the said post code order dated 1.7.1986. According to the petitioner, respondents M.A. Borikar and T.P.S. Pillai (respondents No. 3 and 4) respectively were junior to him in the cadre of "Section Officer" but they were promoted from the post of "Section Officer" to the Post of "Under Secretary" vide order dated 16.09.1986. This gave rise to the grievance of the petitioner. According to him, he has been illegally superseded and not promoted on the post of 'Under Secretary' though he is senior to the respondents No. 3 and 4. It has been for forth by the petitioner that vide order dated 12.12.1986 he was appointed on the post of "Assistant Research Officer" in the pay scale of Rs. 1,000-1,920. Earlier, while serving on the post of Sec. Officer, he was drawing the salary of the pay scale of Rs. 1000-1800.00.

(3.) The case of the petitioner before the Tribunal was that adverse remarks were attributed to him in the year 1981-82 and 1982-83 and were communicated to him in the month of June, 1984. According to him, despite there had been adverse remarks, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Research Officer which is a higher post than that of a Sec. Officer and, therefore, even if there were certain adverse remarks in service carrier, they lost their significance and were wiped out on account of his promotion, as a result of which they were not considered as an obstacle for his further promotion to the higher post of "Technical Assistant". It has been observed by the Tribunal that the pay scale of the "Technical Assistant is the same as that of the Assistant Research Officer, however, it carries a special pay of Rs. 100.00 in addition.