SATISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Grievance of the petitioner is that vide notification dated 04.05.2016 persons junior to him have been granted promotion while he was illegally excluded from consideration. The petitioner has made a prayer for grant of promotion in Category-9.

(2.) Heard.

(3.) The materials brought on record would disclose that the petitioner is senior to the persons at serial nos. 2 to 5 in notification dated 04.05.2016. In the seniority list prepared by the department his name appears at serial no.2 whereas, the name of one Ishwar Singh and others find place below the petitioner. The petitioner has asserted that he was appointed on 24.07.1978 on the post of Statistical Assistant and on 24.07.1982 he was confirmed in service. The respondent-State in its counter-affidavit has also admitted that vide memo dated 27.01.2016 his service stands confirmed. However, in the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee which was held on 29.02016 his case was not considered for promotion in Category 9 (Statistics) on account of vigilance clearance and confirmation of his service. Now it is admitted by the respondents that on account of negligence of the concerned officer necessary information in respect of confirmation in service was not forwarded to the DPC, however, vigilance clearance was received only on 17.05.2016. In the light of the aforesaid facts, claim of the petitioner for promotion in Category 9 was not considered.