AMAR NATH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was appointed as Ayurvedic Medical Officer in the Respondent -Department in the year 1970. However, the fact of the matter is that in the year 1999, 36 Ayurvedic Medical Officers were promoted on ad hoc basis to the posts of Sub Divisional Ayurvedic Medical Officers. Thereafter, 6 more promotions were made on 3.7.1999 to the posts of Sub Divisional Ayurvedic Medical Officers. Petitioner was in the zone of consideration. He made representation, vide Annexure A -1 on 27.9.2000, which was forwarded by the District Ayurvedic Officer, Bilaspur on 28.9.2000 to the Director of Ayurveda. It has come in the reply that the case of the Petitioner was considered and his name was sent to the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commissioner for promotion to the post of Sub Divisional Ayurvedic Medical Officer on regular basis. This was done after completing all the codal formalities, like obtaining of vigilance clearance certificate, finalization of seniority list and completion of A.C. Rs for the last five years. Petitioner superannuated on 31.10.2000, without being considered for promotion to the post of Sub Divisional Ayurvedic Medical Officer. The Departmental Promotion Committee was held only after the Petitioner superannuated and Respondent No. 5 was also promoted to the post of Sub Divisional Ayurvedic Medical Officer.

(2.) THE Court is of the considered view that once the posts were lying vacant, Petitioner ought to have been considered for promotion before his superannuation on 31.10.2000. Ad hoc promotions were made to the posts of Sub Divisional Ayurvedic Medical Officers initially by promoting 36 incumbents and thereafter 6 more incumbents were promoted on 3.7.1999. Petitioner cannot be made to suffer due to delay in completion of codal formalities. It is not a case of the Respondent - Department that the vacancies were not available. It is due to administrative lapse that the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Sub Divisional Ayurvedic Medical Officer was not considered before his date of retirement.

(3.) IN the case in hand also, Petitioner has been deprived of his valuable right to be considered for promotion by the inaction on the part of the Respondent -Department by not completing codal formalities and convening the Departmental Promotion Committee in time.