(1.) In the instant petition, the petitioner has questioned the validity of memo dated 27.4.2004, order dated 10.1.2011 and order dated 6.8.2012 (Annexures P-3, P-10 and P-12 respectively). Further he has sought for direction to consider his name for promotion to the post of Assistant Superintendent w.e.f. 23.12.2005 the date on which Shri Rajbir Singh and others were promoted who are stated to be juniors. He has also sought for direction to grant 3rd ACP which was due on 1.1.2006.
(2.) The petitioner while working as a clerk during the year 1997- 98, Reporting Authority and Reviewing Authority passed an annual confidential report in favour of the petitioner. However, Deputy Commissioner, Jind did not agree with the Reporting Authority and Reviewing Authority and proceeded to pass adverse remarks which reads as under:
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Deputy Commissioner, Jind passed annual confidential report for the years 1997-98 as doubtful integrity and average and he does not agree with the Reporting Authority and Reviewing Authority. Further it is recorded "As far as I remember certain disciplinary/Criminal cases were pending against him." He further submitted that it is true that the petitioner was involved in a criminal case in an FIR No.224 dated 16.1992. However, the petitioner was acquitted in the said case on 11.4.1997 prior to writing of annual confidential report for the year 1997-98 on 27.4.2004 by the Deputy Commissioner, Jind. That apart the period of suspension has been treated as duty on 19.5.1997 (Annexure P-8). Despite these factual aspects, Deputy Commissioner has failed to apply his mind and he is biased in writing annual confidential report for the reasons that with his personal knowledge of pendency of disciplinary proceedings/criminal cases. He is writing annual confidential report at the same time he has failed to verify fate of the criminal case which was decided on 11.4.1997 itself. Further suspension period has been treated as duty. Therefore, Annexure P-3 is without application of mind and non consideration of relevant facts like date of acquittal as well as treating the suspension period as duty. Hence, Annexure P-3 is liable to be set aside. The rejection of representations are liable to be set aside. Hence, petitioner is entitled for promotion to the post of Assistant Superintendent on par with the juniors and from the date on which juniors were promoted. The petitioner is also entitled for grant of 3rd ACP which is due to the petitioner as on 1.1.2006.