SOM NATH MALHOTRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: -

(2.) The factual aspects, as has been delineated in the writ application, in a nutshell is that the petitioner joined his service in the month of October, 1975 as a Sub Inspector under the respondents-CISF and thereafter, considering his service career, the petitioner has been granted promotion to the higher rank and ultimately, he has been granted promotion in the rank of Commandant w.e.f. 04.01.2006 and has been posted from one place to another and now, he has been posted as a Commandant in CISF, 2nd Reserve Battalion, Dhurwa, Ranchi and is discharging his duties without any complaint from any quarter. It has been averred that the petitioner, during his entire service career, has never been put under suspension nor any departmental proceedings has ever been initiated against him, rather, during his period of posting in different capacities under the respondents-CISF, has got appreciation letters which would be apparent from various certificates issued in this regard as per Annexure-1 series. It has further been averred that after the promotion in the post of Commandant, a combined seniority list has been prepared by the respondents authorities on 31.12.2007 for which, the name of the petitioner appears at Serial No. 20 and the petitioner was performing his duties to the satisfaction of the higher authorities with utmost sincerity and was expecting his promotion to the rank of Senior Commandant but in a highly illegal and unreasonable manner, the departmental Promotion Committee constituted by the competent authority for filling the vacancies by way of promotion for the year 2008-09, has been convened in which, although the case of the petitioner was considered but, he has not been given promotion and to the utter consternation of the petitioner, the officers at Sl. No. 21 and from 23 to 28, have been granted promotion in the rank of Senior Commandant but without any reason, the petitioner has not been given promotion in the rank of Senior Commandant. Being aggrieved thereof, the petitioner made a due representation, dated 22.09.2009, before the respondent No.2, explaining in details that from the date of his promotion to the rank of Commandant, he has not been given any adverse remarks and the respondents authorities have issued one letter dated 27.10.2009, issued by the respondent no.3, communicating therein, that he has been assessed not entitled for promotion and therefore, his name has been rejected. Left with no alternative and efficacious remedy, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently submitted that the impugned order (Annexure-4) is fit to be set aside on the ground that the same has been passed merely on the ground that some adverse entry being in the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) of the petitioner, but the said adverse entry has never been communicated to him and as such, the ground taken by the authorities in rejecting the claim of the petitioner that the case of the petitioner has been assed as "Unfit" is not sustainable in the eyes of law because the ground for rejection of the claim of the petitioner amounts to punishment, which is without providing opportunity to the petitioner and the action of the respondents is violative of Articles 14 of the Constitution of India.