W.A. No.1096/2009
8.12.2010
Shri R.B. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Kumaresh Pathak, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate for the
respondents.
On consent of the learned counsel for the parties the
matter is finally heard.
This intracourt appeal has been preferred against the
order dated 2492009 passed by he learned Single Judge in W.P.
No.299/2006(S).
The facts giving rise to filing of the instant appeal, briefly
stated, are that the appellant is employed as SubEngineer
(Civil) in Water Resources Department of the State of M.P.
Juniors of the appellant were promoted on the post of Assistant
Engineer on 5042003. Being aggrieved by his supersession
the appellant filed the writ petition before this Court. During
the pendency of the writ petition before this Court a review
DPC was held on 762007 in which the case of the appellant as
well as three other candidates was considered for promotion.
The appellant was found fit for promotion. The review DPC
recommended promotion of the appellant with effect from
542003. However, the aforesaid fact could not be noticed by
the learned Single Judge and the writ petition preferred by the
appellant was disposed of with certain directions. Being
aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant preferred this
writ appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
action of the respondents in not giving effect to the
recommendations of the review DPC, dated 762007 is
patently arbitrary and illegal.
On the other hand, Shri Kumaresh Pathak, learned Dy.
Advocate General fairly submitted that the case of the appellant
has been considered by the review DPC held on 762007 and
the DPC has recommended that the appellant be promoted
with effect from 542003, i.e., date his juniors were promoted.
We have considered the submissions on both sides. It
appears from the ordersheet that the respondents were
granted several opportunities to seek instructions in the matter.
However, the State Government has failed to file reply. Learned
Dy. Advocate General is not in a position to make statement
before us whether recommendations made by the review DPC
have been implemented or not.
However, in the facts and circumstances of the case and
taking into account the nature of the controversy involved in
the appeal and as agreed to be by the learned counsel for the
parties, the instant writ appeal is disposed of with the direction
to the respondents to consider the recommendations made by
the review DPC, dated 762007 in proper perspective and to
grant promotion to the appellant as well as to award him all the
consequential benefits. The aforesaid exercise shall be
completed within a period of one month from the date of
production of certified copy of this order. However, if on
account of some legal impediment it is not possible for the
respondents to grant promotion to the appellant, the
respondents shall pass a reasoned order and communicate the
same to the appellant within a period of four weeks from the
date of production of certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ appeal stands
finally disposed of.
C.c. as per rules.
(S.R.Alam) (Alok Aradhe)
Chief Justice Judge
ac.