GYANENDRA SINGH Vs. BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUATION BHOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition by the petitioner by which the petitioner has called in question the gradation list contained in Annexure P-1, in which the petitioner, despite being inductee of the year 1994, has been placed below respondent No. 3.

(2.) It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that the matter stands in narrow compass, inasmuch as, the petitioner and respondent No. 3 had participated in the process of promotion against the post of Personal Assistant/Stenographer. The promotions are governed by the Regulations, which are known and styled as "Madhya Pradesh Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal Seva Bharti Evam Padonnati Viniyam, 1997 (hereinafter referred as to the Regulations). As per the Schedule appended to the said Regulations, the criteria was seniority and fitness and the employee concerned should have passed Hindi typing examination from Madhya Pradesh Sheeghralekhan Evam Mudralekhan Pariksha Parishad. The petitioner as well as respondent No. 3 both have qualified the aforesaid examination. However, to the misfortune of the petitioner, despite respondent No.3 being junior, upon promotion as Personal Assistant, he has been placed over and above the petitioner in the gradation list (Annexure P-1 at page number 14 of the petition). It is further contended that the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short DPC) has taken recourse to a method which is alien to the statutory provisions contained in the Regulations. As per the Schedule, appended to the Regulations, the criteria was seniority cum fitness and also the candidate was required to possess with the certificate issued by the aforesaid Parishad. There was no requirement of conducting any such test in the Regulation, yet a test was conducted, details of which find mention in paragraphs 6.9 & 7 of the minutes of the DPC proceedings (Annexure P-13) and as per the said test, since respondent No. 3, according to official respondents, was more accurate and made less mistakes, he was placed over and above the petitioner. It is argued that conduct of such test was an unknown procedure and was not at all mentioned in the Schedule appended to the Regulations. It is not known to the petitioner as to on what basis, it was decided to conduct the said test as the Regulations do not provide for conduct of any kind of test so as to assess the suitability of an employee. Therefore, placement of respondent No. 3 over and above the petitioner goes contrary to the provisions contained in the Regulations as well as Schedule appended thereto.

(3.) Per contra, the counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that the petitioner has approached this Court belatedly. There is no challenge by the petitioner to the minutes of the DPC. The petitioner was sitting on the fence for years together and now has approached this Court questioning his placement in the gradation list dtd. 21/5/2013. It is further contended that the petitioner was not fulfilling the requisite criteria i.e. certificate from Madhya Pradesh Sheeghralekhan Evam Mudralekhan Pariksha Parishad and, therefore, it was thought proper to evaluate the candidature on the basis of result of the typing test by the DPC. The petitioner failed to qualify the said test and considering the result of the said test, relevant findings arrived at in DPC. A document to that effect has been brought on record as as Annexure AR/2 along with the Additional Return. Thus, the petition is liable to be dismissed.