SULSE BAXLA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that in the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 22.6.2004, name of the petitioner alongwith others even juniors to the petitioner were considered for promotion but the case of the petitioner was kept in abeyance for want of Annual Confidential Remarks. However, on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee, persons junior to the petitioner were given promotion to the post of Additional Collector. However, subsequently, another meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee held on 19.5.2005 and the petitioner alongwith others including Upendra Narayan Oraon were given promotion to the post of Additional Collector but the promotion of the petitioner like that of Upendra Narayan Oraon was made effective with effect from 24.12.2005 i.e., from the date of notification issued in terms of the decision taken in the Departmental Promotion Committee on 19.5.2005, as a result of which, the seniority of the petitioner got affected adversely as junior to the petitioner have been placed senior to petitioner. In that situation, when Upendra Narayan Oraon filed a writ application before this Court vide W.P.(S) No. 1583 of 2008, he was found entitled to the promotion with effect from 1.11.2004, on which date the promotions to juniors were given. Similar is the case with the petitioner, who is entitled to promotion with effect from 1.11.2004.

(2.) HAVING heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, I do find that the petitioner's case was considered in the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee held on 22.6.2004 but on that date, case of the petitioner was not considered as character roll was not made available and therefore, post was kept reserved. Subsequently, when the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee held in the year 2005, the petitioner was found fit for promotion and accordingly, notification to that effect was issued on 24.12.2005 (Annexure -6) under which promotion was made effective from the date of issuance of the notification, though earlier one post was kept vacant and when he was found eligible for promotion by the second Departmental Promotion Committee, the petitioner should have given promotion with effect from 1 .11 .2004 the date from which other 'persons junior to the petitioner were given promotion. Accordingly, I do find that the petitioner is entitled for promotion with effect from 1.11.2004.

(3.) WITH the aforesaid direction/observation, this writ application is disposed of.