LAWS(GAU)-2024-4-8

TAPAN KUMAR DAS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On April 01, 2024
TAPAN KUMAR DAS Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed with the following grievances:

(2.) The petitioner was an Officer of the North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited (NEEPCO) and had retired from service on 31/8/2021 as a Senior Manager (Civil). The petitioner who belongs to the Schedule Caste Community had joined the Organization on 30/5/1988 as SDO (Civil) and was subsequently promoted to the post of Executive Engineer (Assistant Manager) on 3/9/1996. It is the case of the petitioner that though on 1/7/1998, he had become eligible for consideration for promotion to the next higher post of Deputy Manager, he was given such promotion on 27/3/2002, however, with retrospective effect from 1/7/1998. Subsequently, on 1/7/2001, the petitioner claims to have become eligible for promotion for the post of Manager (Civil). However, there was delay in holding the DPC and it was ultimately on 29/7/2003 that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Manager (Civil), however, no retrospective effect was given. The petitioner had filed representation on 25/8/2003 for giving such benefit which was however turned down vide a reply dtd. 8/11/2004 in which certain reasons including pendency of Court case were cited by the NEEPCO.

(3.) As per the petitioner, on 1/7/2004 he had become eligible for promotion to the post of Senior Manger (Civil) and was ultimately promoted to the said post on 10/8/2006. On 1/7/2009, the petitioner claims to have become eligible for promotion to the post of Deputy General Manager and had also appeared in 5 numbers of DPC which were held on 2/3/2012, 30/4/2014, 25/6/2015, 7/3/2017 and 27/6/2017. However, the case of the petitioner was not recommended and no reasons were also communicated to him. As regards the grievance no. 3 is concerned, the projected case of the petitioner is that he is entitled to such relief as per Rule 13.2.2 of the Manual. Though there is a reply on record by the NEEPCO that such Rules are not applicable for the post/level held by the petitioner it is contended that such benefits were given to others also and therefore the petitioner should be given such benefits.