ARJUN PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner arises on account of the notification dated 20.8.2010 contained in memo no. 1577 by which he has been denied promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Excise w.e.f. 31.5.2007 on the ground that he has superannuated on 31.7.2009 and could not have joined on the promoted post retrospectively.

(3.) THEREAFTER , the petitioner pursued the contempt petition being Contempt(Civil) No. 184 of 2010. The Departmental Promotion Committee(D.P.C.) meeting was held on 26.4.2010, minutes of which is part of Annexure -14 annexed to the writ petition. The said minutes of the D.P.C were obtained by the petitioner under R.T.I and had also been filed along with its reply to the show cause in Contempt(Civil) No. 184 of 2010 i.e. enclosed as Annexure -14 to the present writ application as well. The D.P.C was presided over by the Chairman i.e. Member, Board of Revenue, Jharkhand and was comprised of the Principal Secretary of the Excise Department and the Excise Commissioner as well. It made recommendation in favour of the petitioner that he is entitled to be promoted to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Excise w.e.f. 31.5.2007. It also recorded in the said minutes that for promotion to the next higher post of Deputy Commissioner of Excise the minimum period prescribed for the incumbent to remain on the post of Assistant Commissioner of Excise is 4 years, which obviously the petitioner had not been able to fulfill after he was found fit for promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Excise on 31.5.2007. The petitioner had retired on 31.7.2009 before the recommendation for promotion was made. The minutes also stated that the opinion of the Finance Department be taken before issuing order of any promotion to the petitioner.