N.P. TIWARI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed challenging the correctness of the order dated 20.8.2008, by which it is communicated to the petitioner that after holding a review Departmental Promotion Committee and considering the case of the petitioner, he is found unfit for promotion on the post of Block Development Officer. In fact, this is a second round of litigation before this Court.

(2.) Facts giving rise to filing of this petition in brief are that the petitioner while was in service, was put to departmental action in the year 1997. A Departmental Promotion Committee meeting was convened on 26.2.1998 and though the case of the petitioner was considered, but he was not promoted on the post of Block Development Officer. At the relevant time, the petitioner was working as Block Extension Officer. Juniors to the petitioner were promoted and, therefore, it led to filing of an Original Application No.2810/1998 before the M.P. Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur. The said petition was entertained, notices were issued to the respondents and the same remained pending before the Tribunal when a decision was taken by the State Government to close down the Tribunal. As a result of the closure of the Tribunal, the Original Application came on transfer to this Court where it was registered as Writ Petition No.13008/2003. The petition came up for hearing before this Court on 15.12.2006. Considering that the petitioner has not impleaded the juniors who have superseded him in the matter of promotion in the petition, and as none was present for the petitioner to prosecute the petition, the same was dismissed on 15.12.2006.

(3.) The petitioner preferred a writ appeal against the said order being Writ Appeal No.468/2007. The Division Bench of this Court considered the fact, taken note of the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner to the extent that after completion of the departmental enquiry against the petitioner and his complete exoneration in the said enquiry, his case for promotion was not reviewed. However, the aspect whether the case of the petitioner was considered in the Departmental Promotion Committee of the year 1998 or not, was not considered and it was directed to hold a review Departmental Promotion Committee to reconsider the case of the petitioner in appropriate manner. It is the case of the petitioner that this order was brought to the notice of the authorities, however, they have not considered the case of the petitioner in appropriate manner and by the order dated 20.8.2008 again it is communicated that the petitioner is not found fit for such promotion from the date the juniors to the petitioner were promoted. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that if the claim of the petitioner was not considered for promotion in appropriate manner, the Fundamental Right available to the petitioner to be considered for promotion was violated and, therefore, this second round of litigation was required to be brought to this Court. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-