SUNIL KUMAR DASH Vs. DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Sunil Kumar Dash, a Junior Clerk in the judgeship of Keonjhar, Has sought to challenge the Order Dated 25.11.2002 passed by the Learned District Judge, Keonjhar giving promotion to Opposite Party No. 2, who was junior to the Petitioner, on the ground that the Petitioner has certain adverse entries in his Confidential Character Roll.

(2.) CASE of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner joined as Junior Clerk in the judgeship of Keonjhar after having successfully passed in the competitive examination and was appointed on probation with effect from 4.3.1982. Petitioner also passed the Departmental Examination on 20.5.1988 and was confirmed as a Junior Clerk as on 1.2.1992. Since then he was working as Junior Clerk in the office of SDJM, Keonjhar. Petitioner claims that he is the senior -most Junior Clerk in the judgeship of Keonjhar and is placed at serial No. 1 in the gradation list in the year 2002. As he possesses unblemished service record, under Rule 10 of the Orissa District and Subordinate Courts Ministerial Services (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter called the 'Rules') he was eligible for promotion to the post of Senior Clerk and therefore, he claims that he is entitled for promotion to the next higher post, i.e., Senior Clerk. It is further submitted that the Petitioner completed accounts training on 23.4.1992, which is a mandatory requirement for being considered for promotion. According to the Petitioner, since the Senior Clerk working as Bench Clerk to the SDJM, Anandapur was promoted to the post of Senior Upper Division clerk, the said post of Senior Clerk fell vacant and instead of promoting the present Petitioner, Opposite Party No. 2, who was at serial No. 3 in the gradation list was promoted to the said post vide Order Dated 25.11.2002.

(3.) MR . S.P. Misra, Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, inter alia, submitted that the Petitioner had been communicated with the adverse remarks for the years 2000 -01 and 1997 -98 vide memos dated 22.12 2001 and 16.11.2002 under Annexures 4 and 5 respectively. The said adverse entries were communicated just prior to the consideration of promotion to the post of Senior clerk and the delayed communicated itself was mala fide since the Petitioner did not have time to make representation against the same. In terms of the :G.A. Department Memo No. 741/PRO. 11/81(SE) dated 5.2.1982 instructions were issued by the State Government indicating the manner and procedure for recording, maintaining and communication of adverse remarks in the Confidential Character Rolls of non -gazetted employees and disposal of representations. Mr. Misra has placed reliance upon Clause (xiv) of the aforesaid memo. Same is extracted below for convenience and ready reference: (xiv) Communication of adverse remarks -The C.Rs. on receipt, will be scrutinized in the office of the appointing authority and all adverse remarks will be communicated to the employee by the officer entrusted with their maintenance of C.Rs. The purpose of communication is to ensure that the employee rectifies the defect at the earliest. Hence, the utmost priority should be given to communication of adverse remarks. All such communications should normally issue before 31st December immediately following the report period. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that since the adverse entries in the CCR of the Petitioner had not been communicated within the period prescribed same ought to have been ignored, and could not have been the basis for assessing the Petitioner for promotion as a Senior Clerk.