MANICK LAL PATHAK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -The writ petitioner in the present writ application joined as a Forest Ranger in the year 1965. The next. higher promotional post is that of extra Assistant Conservator of forest. The petitioner was confirmed in the said post of Forest Ranger in the year 1967. The writ petition had been initiated in the year 1988 with the grievance that for no just ground he had been. kept deprived of promotion as also of the Selection Grade and had been superseded by the private respondents since the year 1976 by which time he has acquired eligibility for promotion as also for being granted the Selection Grade along with others. During the pendency of the writ application, however, the petitioner had been given promotion with effect from 12th of August, 1988. The relief, therefore, which the petitioner now claims is that his promotion to the West Bengal Forest Service, which had been constituted in the meantime, should be ante-dated so that he gets all the benefits attached to such promotion including seniority since 1975-the year of completion of his eligibility period, by treating him to have been notionally promoted to the post of extra Assistant Conservator of Forest in the West Bengal Junior Forest Service and granted selection Grade since the said year when his juniors, who have been impleaded as private respondents to the present writ application, had been given the said benefits.

(2.) In spite of opportunities having been granted, no affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the state respondents. On behalf of the said respondents relevant records, however, have been relied upon. Both the contesting parties have supplemented their oral submission by written arguments and on behalf of petitioner as also appearing state respondents xerox copies of the aforesaid relevant records have been produced and made parts of the records of the instant proceeding.

(3.) From the written submissions, as filed on behalf of the state respondents, it appears that the state respondents have sought to justify the non-conferment of the benefits claimed by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was not considered fit by the Public Service Commission for being promoted to the post of extra Assistant Conservator of Forest though his case had been sent up with necessary and relevant details alongwith other eligible prospective promotees to the Public Service Commission for its consideration. The state respondents have further stated that the petitioner's case regarding the Selection Grade is under consideration on the basis of recommendation of the concerned department.