SUSHILA PARDHI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE original petitioner was Indra Kumar Pardhi who died during the pendency of this petition and present petitioner Smt. Sushila Pardhi is the widow and who has been brought on record as legal representative. For the sake of convenience, in this judgment deceased Indra Kumar Pardhi is denoted as petitioner.

(2.) BY this petition, the petitioner has sought relief for the consideration of his name for promotion to the post of Ayurvedic Medical Officer with a further direction that his name may be included in promotion order Annexure A/3 dated 18 -1 -1994 by modifying the said order.

(3.) THE contention of Shri D. S. Thakur, Learned Counsel is that the employees who were junior to petitioner have been promoted on 25 -1 -1994, however, on account of arbitrary action of respondents, the petitioner was not promoted. The contention of Learned Counsel is that as per rules, namely, M.P. (Indian Systems of Medicine and Homeopathy) Class III Ministerial Service Recruitment Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules') are applicable to the petitioner and the schedule 2 of the said rules prescribes promotion to the post of Ayurvedic Medical Officer 60% by direct recruitment by means of selection interview test and 40% by promotion. The petitioner is claiming for promotion under 40% quota. The criteria for promotion is seniority -cum -merit. In the IVth Schedule of M.P. Public Health (Indian System of Medicine and Homeopathy (Gazetted) Recruitment Rules 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Gazetted Recruitment Rules of 1987, the feeder post is Assistant Ayurvedic Medical Officer. According to the schedule, the candidates who had experience as Assistant Ayurvedic Medical Officer are competent to be promoted to the said post in the manner prescribed in Rules 13 and 14 of the Gazetted Recruitment Rules of 1987. According to Rule 13, the DPC consists of members mentioned in schedule IV for making selection and in the said schedule Director, ISM and H and Member, should be the persons to constitute the DPC which shall recommend the promotions. According to the Learned Counsel though petitioner was entitled for promotion, however, he had not been promoted and thus respondents may be directed to consider the case of his promotion.