Delhi High Court High Court

Sh. Mohd. Neeral Haque And Ors. vs Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. And Ors. on 11 March, 1999

Delhi High Court
Sh. Mohd. Neeral Haque And Ors. vs Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. And Ors. on 11 March, 1999
Equivalent citations: 79 (1999) DLT 116, 1999 (49) DRJ 497
Author: K Ramamoorthy
Bench: K Ramamoorthy


JUDGMENT

K. Ramamoorthy, J.

1. The petitioners were directly recruited to the posts of Assistant Engineers in 1984 and they joined the services of the first, respondent in 1987. On the 20th of February, 1996, the first respondent passed an order promoting nine officers, including petitioners, as Engineer-In-Charge(Sr.Manager Engg.) with effect from the dates mentioned against the names of the officers. The order reads as under:-

Sub: Filling up vacancies of Engineer-in-Charge (Sr.Manager Engg) in , Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited.

Appointment of following Dy.Engineer in-Charge (Managers Engg) of
Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited as Engineer-in-Charge (Sr.Manager Engg)
with effect from the date indicated against each or from the date they
reported for duty (in case the officers were on leave) has been authorised:

S.

No.

Name

Present
Branch of posting as EC (Sr. Manager (Engg.)

Date
of Promotion

1.

Shri Md. J .Sheikh(EC)

Calcutta

01.04.1993

2.

Shri Md. Noorul
Hazue

Calcutta

01.04.1993

3.

Shri R.P. Arya

New Delhi

01.04.1993

4.

Shri Sheshi
Shekharam

Mumbai

01.04.1993

5.

Shri Debasis K.Dey

Mumbai

01.04.1993

6.

Shri T.M. Vasudevan

Mumbai

01.04.1993

7.

Shri H.S.V. Prasad

HQ(TP)

01.04.1993

8.

Shri Anil K. Mishra

IBS

01.04.1993

9.

Shri L. Srivastava

Mumbai

01.04.1993

2. Consequent on promotion of the officer at Sr.No.l above, his name appeared in this office order No.HQ-B/03/01/(2)/94 PE.2 dated 23.02.1994 shall stand deleted from the said order.

3. All the above officers may note that they have option to get their pay fixed in the promoted post from the date of promotion or from the date of their next increment in the lower post as per the existing rules. They should furnish their option to the Head of Office not later than the expiry of one month from the date of issue of this order and option once exercised shall be final.

4. The inter seniority of the above officers and the officers promoted vide this office orders No.HQ-B/03-01(2)/94-PE2 dated 23.2.94, No.HQ B/03-01(6)/94-PE.2 dated 20.12.94 and No.HQ-B/03-01 (2)/94 PE.2 dated 31.3.95 shall be as under:

Sr.No. Name

1. Shri S.C.Siddalingaswamy

2. Shri C.S.Sastry

3. Shri K.S.N.Murthy

4. Shri T.Senthil Vinayagam

5. Shri S.K.Arya

6. Shri Francis Thomas

7. Shri Prasant Kulkarni

8. Shri MdJ.Sheikh

9. Shri K.Srinivasan

10. Shri Md.Noorul Haque

11. Shri R.P.Arya

12. Shri Seshi Shekharam

13. Shri S.K.Pathak

14. Shri G.Subbaiah

15. Shri S.S.Gakhar

16. Shri B.KMondal

17. Shri ZJ.Manhala

18. Shri V.Ramachandran

19. Shri G.G.Gogia

20. Shri S.K.Gupta

21. Shri Debasis K.Dey

22. Shri M.Tamil Selvan

23. Shri T.M.Vasudevan

24. Shri H.S.V.Prasad

25. Shri Anil K.Mishra

26. Shri H.Siva Kumar

27. Shri L.Srivastava

28. Shri S.S.Pillai

29. Shri V.P.R.Nair

30. Shri P.Dung Dung

31. Shri P.M.Krishan

32. Shri U.A.Rizvi

33. Shri J.Muklropadhyay

34. Shri V.KX.Narasimhan

35. Shri P.R.Gupta

36. Shri Rajendra Singh

37. Shri A.N.Bansode

38. Shri Ramesh Chandra

39. Shri B.B.Saha

40. Shri P.C.Vittolia

41. Shri A.S.Katke

42. Shri Shiv Narain

43. Shri R.S.Bhatti

44. Shri G.Prabhakara Rao

45. Shri S.S.Malik

46. Shri R.M.Poddar

47. Shri M.Nampoothiri M.

48. Shri A.K.Gupta

2. On the 26th of February, 1996, the order passed by the first respondent on the 20th of February, 1996 was withdrawn. The .order reads as under

Sub: Filling up vacancies of Managers(Engg) and Sr.Manager (Engg) in Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited.

Attention is invited to this office orders No.HQ-A/01/(6)/90-PE2 dated 20.2.96 and of even number and dated regarding promotion of following officers to the post of Managers(Engg) and Sr.Managers(Engg) respectively, in Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited:-

S.No.

Name

Present
place of posting

1.

Shri Md. J.

Sheikh(EC)

Calcutta

2.

Shri Md. Noorul
Hazue

Calcutta

3.

Shri R.P. Arya

New Delhi

4.

Shri Sheshi
Shekharam

Mumbai

5.

Shri Debasis K.Dey

Mumbai

6.

Shri T.M. Vasudevan

Mumbai

7.

Shri H.S.V.Prasad

HQ(TP)

8.

Shri Anil K.Mishra

IBS

9.

Shri L. Srivastava

Mumbai

2. The above promotion orders of Manager(Engg) and Sr.Manager(Engg) are hereby withdrawn.”

3. On the 8th of May, 1996, the petitioners, including other officers, were again promoted as Senior Managers(Engg.) w.e.f.1.1.1996.

4. Pursuant to the order passed on the 20th of February, 1996, the officers mentioned in that order had taken charge on the 23rd of February, 1996 but because of the order dated 26.2.1996 they were reverted to the original position till they were restored by order dated 8.5.1996. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 26.2.1996 and claimed the benefits from 1.4.1993 from which date the persons who were juniors to petitioners were promoted as Engineer-In-Charge.

5. According to the petitioners, no opportunity was given to the petitioners before passing the order dated 26.2.1996 and there was absolutely no material for the first respondent to pass the order dated 26.2.1996. According to the petitioners, they were validly promoted on the 20th of February, 1996.

6. In the counter, filed by the first, respondent, it is stated:

“That after the issuance of revised seniority list of AEs, a revised Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) was conducted to review the promotions granted to higher post based on the pre-revised seniority list, revised promotion orders were issued on 20.2.96. However the said promotion order was subsequently withdrawn since the principle embodied in the Ministry in the Ministry of Home Affairs OM dated 24.12.59 was felt inappropriate.”

7. The first respondent has not given any reason as to what made the first respondent to come to the conclusion that the principle embodied in the OM dated 24.12.59 was considered inappropriate. The first respondent has not stated the facts fully and there is absolutely no justification for withdrawing the order dated 20.2.1996. On this short ground, the writ petition is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

8. The order dated 26.2.1996 is set aside. The petitioners are deemed to have been promoted w.e.f.01.04.1993. The first respondent shall grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioners.

9. There shall be no order as to costs.