GANGA SAGAR CHAUBE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the State respondents has filed two counter affidavits, one on behalf of respondents 2 and 4 and other on behalf of respondent no. 5. Both the counter affidavits are taken on record.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

(3.) TWO counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the State respondents. Perusal of those counter affidavit indicates that the case of the petitioner was considered for promotion in the year 1994 but he was not found fit for promotion as at that time two departmental proceedings were pending against him. Later, in one of those proceedings he was exonerated of the charges levelled against him but in the other departmental proceeding punishment of one black mark was imposed against him. Against the punishment of one black mark the petitioner filed an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Saran Range who under his orders dated 16.7.1998 as contained in annexure 3 exonerated the petitioner of the charges levelled against him and consequently also quashed the punishment order of one black mark imposed against the petitioner. As of date the petitioner stands exonerated of the charges levelled against him, as such, the authorities are obliged to reconsider his claim for promotion with effect from the date his juniors have been allowed promotion.