BIRENDRA KUMAR Vs. COAL INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties finally.

(2.) MR . Kalyan Roy, appearing for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has challenged the notice dated 5.6.2008 (Annexure -4) by which several employees including the petitioner have been asked to appear in the qualifying examination for promotion from nonexecutive cadre to executive cadre in Secretariat discipline. He further submitted that petitioner and others filed writ petitions being C.W.J.C. No. 3482 of 1998 which was disposed of on 31.8.2005. The operative portion of the said order reads as follows: In all the writ petitions, the petitioners have become eligible for promotion and after written test and interview they were selected for promotion. Since it is not a case of fresh appointment, I am of the view that even after the expiry of the panel, the cases of the petitioners are bound to be considered by the respondents' authority for giving promotion. Learned Counsel for the petitioner by filing affidavits have given the existing vacant posts where the petitioners are to be promoted. This fact has not been controverted by the respondents. It is, therefore, high time the respondents should consider the cases of the petitioner for giving them promotion to E -2 cadre. The respondents filed L.P.A. being L.P.A. No. 680 of 2005 which was heard with other cases and disposed of by order dated 5.7.2006 affirming the order of learned Single Judge. Then the respondents filed S.L.P. (Civil) No. 9831 of 2006 before the Supreme Court which was disposed of on 18.9.2007 by passing the following order: Mr. Ajit Kumr Sinha, learned Counsel appearing for Coal India Limited states that there are 40 vacancies available in E2 grade which have now been notified by Coal India and he further submits that all eligible candidates will be considered for the aforesaid posts in accordance with law. In view of the statement made by learned Counsel for the petitioners, nothing survives to be adjudicated in these petitions. We, accordingly, disposed of these special leave petitions in the above terms and modify the impugned order of the High Court to that extent. No order as to costs. He further submitted that however the contempt petition filed in the Supreme Court were dismissed. He further submitted that as the petitioner was already eligible having passed the examination far back in 1997, he could not have been asked to appear again in the qualifying examination for promotion by the impugned orders. He further submitted that as per the order of the Supreme Court only the eligible candidates like the petitioner were to be considered for promotion.

(3.) IN reply, Mr. Kalyan Roy submitted that the respondents can prepare another panel of other candidates who might have become eligible by this time, but so far as the petitioner is concerned, as he was eligible from 1997, there is no need for asking him in to appear in examination again.