RAJ BAMIN Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. T. Michi, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. P.K. Mushahar, learned Govt. Advocate for the State respondents.

(2.) I have also considered the affidavit -in -opposition filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 3 and the related documents as well as the writ petition and the annexures thereto, and the records of the proceedings of the DPC held on 3.2,2000 produced b the learned Government Advocate.

(3.) IT was submitted by the learned counsel in above -mentioned Civil Rule that the adverse remarks for the years 1988 -90 were never communicated to the petitioner and as such, the same should not have been taken into consideration by the authority while considering the case of the petitioner for promotion in the year 1990. This Court by an order dated 2.12.1999 (Annexure -A) disposed of the said Civil Rule CR -5869 of 1997 with a direction to consider the question of promotion of the present petitioner to the post of UD Clerk within a period of 3 (three) months and pass necessary orders. This Court further directed that the petitioner's claim for promotion from the date when his junior was promoted in June, 1990 shall also be considered by the DPC, keeping in view the relevant provisions of law.