UNION OF INDIA Vs. SUDARSHAN MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is directed against two orders passed by the learned tribunal (respondent No. 2) herein on 15th September, 2006 in the original application No. 755 of 2005 made by the first respondent and another order dated 20th April, 2007 and 30th April, 2007 passed in C. P. C. No. 200 of 2006. The facts upon perusal of pleadings of both the sides, appear to be admitted and the same are briefly stated hereunder : the first respondent is a Medical Officer of the first writ petitioner. He has completed continuous 19 years of service as Medical Officer. Accepting recommendation of 5th Central Pay Commission, Government of India, ministry of Health and Family Welfare by circular dated 5th April, 2002 introduced a Dynamic Assured Career Progression Scheme (in short the said scheme ). Under the said scheme the General Duty Medical Officer (G. D. M. O.) sub-cadre Medical Officer carrying pay scale of Rs. 8,000 -Rs. 12,500 will be promoted to the post of Senior Medical Officer, carrying pay scale of Rs. 15,000 - Rs. 15,200 on completion of 4 years of regular service. Senior Medical Officer with 5 years of regular service as Senior Medical officer will be promoted to the post of Chief Medical Officer carrying pay scale of Rs. 12,000 - Rs. 16,500 and after completion 'of 4 years of Chief medical Officer Grade, the officer will be promoted to the post of Chief Medical officer (Non-Functional Selection Grade) carrying pay scale of Rs. 14,300 -Rs. 18,300. In substance after completion of 19 years regular service in the g. D. M. O. sub-cadre of CHS, officer of G. D. M. O. sub-cadre will be promoted to the Chief Medical Officer (Non-Functional Selection Grade) carrying pay scale of Rs. 14,300 - Rs. 18,300. The aforesaid scheme for granting promotion will be made without linkage to vacancies. Under the relevant rules for granting promotion to Non Functional Selection Grade, in group 1. Departmental Promotion Committee would be constituted and it would consider last 5 years annual confidential report of the officers to satisfy itself that the overall performance is good and he/she has at least two Very good' gradings in the last 5 years before recommending him or her for placement in Non-Functional Selection Grade (hereinafter referred to as NFSG ). The said Departmental Promotion Committee would enjoy full discretion to devise their own method and procedure for objective assessment of the candidates who are to be considered by them. In case of each officer overall grading should be given. The grading shall be one amongst (i)outstanding; (ii) very good; (in) good; (iv) average; (v) unfit. The grading of those officers being done on the basis of the general remarks in the report should not be communicated even if it is adverse. Along with other candidates the first respondent's case was considered by the Departmental Promotion committee and they found him to be unfit. The first respondent as such being aggrieved by the aforesaid decision of not granting promotion filed the aforesaid application being O. A. No. 755 of 2005 in the learned Central administrative Tribunal on various grounds. The said application was disposed of by the learned Tribunal along with other batch of matters who are similarly placed and aggrieved, by a common judgement and order dated 15th September, 2006. The applicants herein, however, challenged order passed in favour of the first respondent only leaving other persons out.

(2.) LEARNED Tribunal after considering the contention and rival contention of both the parties, considering large number of decisions of the Supreme court and the High Courts as well as the Tribunal assigning detailed reason granted relief to the applicant and the ordering portion of which is set out hereunder:

(3.) THE applicants did not challenge the aforesaid order (hereinafter called as parent order)until 14th June, 2007. On the contrary, in or about october, 2006 the applicants filed an application being M. A. No. 624 of 2006 for extension of time to implement the order dated 15th September, 2006. Learned Tribunal was inclined to grant extension for a month from 15th September, 2006, however, as recorded by the learned Tribunal, on prayer of the learned Counsel for the applicant (Union of India) time was extended till 20th December, 2006 from the date of the order. A copy of such application on which order was passed has also been read by us and it appears therefrom that prayer for extension was unequivocal and without any reservation and there has been clear intention to accept and implement the order. In spite of the said extension being granted no step was taken, as such a contempt application was filed on 22nd December, 2006 for wilful, deliberate violation of the order. The applicants herein again filed an application being M. A. No. 624 of 2006 for granting further extension of time to implement the order dated 15th September, 2006.