NARMADA PRASAD SAXENA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN invocation of jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners in each case have called in question the legal propriety and defensibility of the order passed by the M. P. Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior (in short 'the Tribunal') in OA No. 655/98. The impugned order being a singular one and the factual matrix being the same, all the writ petitions were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common order.

(2.) BE it noted at the very beginning that a Division Bench of the tribunal at Gwalior did not agree with the view taken by the Division Bench of tribunal at Indore in the cases of Arun Kumar Bhatt Vs. State of M. P. (1998 mplsr 535) and Dr. Ashalata Sharma Vs. State of M. P. (1998 MPLSR 767)and accordingly referred the controversy to a larger Bench. The question that was required to be answered by the Full Bench whether an entry in the annual confidential report is found to be of the category 'c and that creates an impediment in the way of promotion of the incumbent should be considered as adverse and what would be the impact and import of its non-communication. The Full Bench of the Tribunal in Paragraphs 23 to 26 proceeded to express the view as under :-

(3.) ORDINARILY we would not have reproduced the aforesaid paragraphs but mr. Sharma, learned Government Advocate has impressed upon us that the tribunal has soundly and appropriately dealt with the matter and there is no scope for any kind of interference in the absence of any kind of infirmity.