DAYARAM SINGH YADAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 07.04.2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (for short 'the Tribunal') in O.A. No. 104 of 2013 whereby the prayer of the petitioner to grant him promotion to the post of Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation (for short 'CBI') from the date of grant of promotion to his junior has been rejected. The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for commanding the respondents to grant him promotion as Superintendent of Police, CBI from the date his junior Sri Raj Kumar Shukla was granted the said promotion being 30.11.2005.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner was selected to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police in CBI and joined as direct recruit Sub-Inspector on 19.01.1971. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Inspector of Police on 26.07.1982. He was further promoted as the Deputy Superintendent of Police on 04.01.1993 and as Additional Superintendent of Police on 11.06.2001. There were five vacancies of general category in the rank of Superintendent of Police in CBI under promotion quota in the year 2005. As per Recruitment Rules, 2000 in force at the relevant time, the Additional Superintendent of Police with six years of regular service in the grade was eligible for promotion to the rank of Superintendent of Police failing which the Additional Superintendent of Police with combined regular service of 12 years in the grades of Additional Superintendent of Police and Deputy Superintendent of Police was eligible for promotion to the rank of Superintendent of Police.

(3.) In order to fill the five vacancies, 13 Additional Superintendent of Police in the feeder grade were required to be considered in the zone of consideration by the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short 'DPC') to draw a panel of suitable candidates for promotion. Accordingly, a proposal including ACR folders in respect of all the 13 Additional Superintendent of Police, CBI in the consideration zone was sent to the UPSC for holding the meeting of DPC, which met on 30.11.2005. The DPC in its meeting held on 30.11.2005 assessed the ACRs for the preceding five years i.e. for the years 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 of all the 13 officers including the petitioner in the consideration zone and assessed five officers 'fit' for promotion to the rank of Superintendent of Police in CBI. The DPC has assessed the petitioner and three others 'unfit' as they did not meet the prescribed benchmark.