Allahabad High Court
Awadhesh Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ... on 4 January, 2024
Author: Manish Kumar
Bench: Manish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:736
Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8822 of 2023
Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. P.W.D. Govt. U.P. Lucknow And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Gaurav Mehrotra,Anant Khanna,Santosh Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Gaurav Mehrotra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred for quashing of the impugned order dated 03.10.2023 passed by respondent no. 3 i.e. Special Secretary, Public Works Department, Govt. of U.P. by which the representation of the petitioner for opening the sealed cover has been rejected and for commanding the respondents particularly the respondent nos. 1 & 2 to grant promotion to the petitioner on the post of Chief Engineer, Level-II, (Civil), P.W.D., in furtherance of the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 29.08.2022 w.e.f. the date when the Officers junior to the petitioner have been granted promotion i.e. w.e.f. 03.07.2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the D.P.C. was held on 29.08.2022 for considering the candidature for promotion from the post of Superintending Engineer to the post of Chief Engineer, Level-II, (Civil), P.W.D. The candidature of the petitioner was also considered by the D.P.C.
4. It is further submitted that on 03.07.2023, the orders of promotions were issued in favour of the Officers who were junior to the petitioner and upon enquiring, the petitioner came to know that the result of his selection has been kept in a sealed cover.
5. It is further submitted that when the name of the petitioner was not in the promotion list and the juniors were promoted, then the petitioner had approached this Court by filing Writ A No. 5221 of 2023 seeking direction to the opposite parties to grant promotion to the petitioner on the post of Chief Engineer, Level-II, (Civil), P.W.D. in furtherance of the recommendation of Departmental Promotion Committee dated 29.08.2022 w.e.f. 03.07.2023 as neither any enquiry was pending against the petitioner nor any charge-sheet was served, hence the petitioner is entitled for promotion as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. K.V. Jankiraman [(1991) 4 SCC 109]. This Court has disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the authorities to decide the representation within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced.
6. The petitioner has made a representation to the respondent no. 2 in compliance of the judgment/order of this Court dated 24.07.2023 and the same has been rejected by the impugned order dated 03.10.2023 on the ground that the charge-sheet was issued against the petitioner on 03.08.2023.
7. It is further submitted that it is an admitted case from the impugned order itself that on the date of consideration by the Departmental Promotion Committee i.e. on 29.08.2022 and on the date of issuance of promotion orders in favour of juniors to the petitioner i.e. 03.07.2023, no charge-sheet was served upon the petitioner and the charge-sheet was issued subsequent to the above mentioned dates.
8. It is further submitted that as per the law settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. K.V. Jankiraman (supra) and in pursuance thereof, the G.O. dated 28.05.1997, the petitioner is entitled for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer, Level-II, (Civil), P.W.D. w.e.f. 03.07.2023, the date from which the juniors have been given promotion.
9. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the candidature of the petitioner has rightly been kept in a sealed cover and was denied promotion as a decision was taken on 23.06.2023 for taking departmental proceedings against the petitioner hence there is no illegality in the impugned order and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, going through the record of the case, the G.O. dated 28.05.1997 and the judgment relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Union of India v. K.V. Jankiraman (supra), the undisputed position which emerges out in the present case is that mere taking a decision for departmental proceedings on 23.06.2023 i.e. subsequent to the date of Departmental Promotion Committee does not dis-entitle the petitioner to be promoted on the post of Chief Engineer, Level-II, (Civil), P.W.D. and to keep the result of his selection in a sealed cover.
11. Similar controversy has been adjudicated in the case of Union of India vs. K.V. Jankiraman (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the sealed cover procedure is to be resorted to only after the charge-memo in the case of criminal prosecution/charge-sheet in the case of departmental proceedings has been issued.
12. The State Government had issued the G.O. dated 28.05.1997 in the light of judgment in the case of Union of India v. K.V. Jankiraman (supra) and para 2(?) specifically provides, which is quoted hereunder:-
"(2) ????????????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ?? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ???????? ?? ?????????? ???????????? ??? (???? ??? ????? ?????? ????????? ??????? ?? ????????? ?? ??? ??????? ???? ??? ?? ?? ????) ??????? ????? ?? ????? ??? ???????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ??????? ??? ???????? ??? ????? ?? ????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???????? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??, ?? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ????? ?? ??????, ???? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ??????? ?? ????????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???-
(?) ??? ??????? ?? ??????? ????????? ????????? ?? ????????????? ?? ????????? ?????? ??, ????? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???"
13. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the discussions made hereinabove, it is found that at the time of holding the Departmental Promotion Committee on 29.08.2022 and on the date the promotion order was issued in favour of the juniors to the petitioner i.e. 03.07.2023, no charge-sheet was issued by the department against the petitioner. Mere taking a decision for departmental proceedings on 23.06.2023 i.e. subsequent to the date of Departmental Promotion Committee does not entitle the authorities to withhold the promotion of the petitioner.
14. No charge-sheet having been issued to the petitioner before the date of Departmental Promotion Committee i.e. 29.08.2022 and the date of promotion of junior officers i.e. 03.07.2023, the action of the authorities in keeping the result of the selection of the petitioner was wholly unjustified and against the law.
15. The writ petition is thus allowed.
16. The impugned order dated 03.10.2023 passed by respondent no. 3 i.e. Special Secretary, Public Works Department, Govt. of U.P. is quashed.
17. The respondent no. 2 is directed to issue an order in the light of recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 29.08.2022 within a period of three weeks from the date of certified copy of this order is served.
Order Date :- 4.1.2024
Nitesh
