Janardan Singh vs The Union Of India & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1030 Cal

11   05.02.2021                  W.P.A.22854 of 2019
as
                                   Janardan Singh
                                         Vs.
                               The Union of India & Ors.


                  Mr. Nilanjan Bhattacharjee,
                  Mr. Aniruddha Karmakar.
                                                       ...for the Petitioner.

                  Mr. Alok Kr. Banerjee,
                  Mr. Pradyut Kr. Das.
                                       ...for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5.

BCCL has filed a report pursuant to the

direction of this Court. Petitioner rely upon

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 21st

November, 2013 passed in SLP No.4246 of 2004.

The operative portion of the judgment is set

out hereinbelow;

" .......Furthermore, we are informed that all the three respondents have now retired. In our opinion, it would be in the interest of justice to direct the appellants to implement the direction issued by the learned Single Judge and to promote the respondents notionally so that they can get some financial benefits."

The Hon'ble Supreme Court has ordered to

implement the direction passed by the co-ordinate

Bench in W.P. No. 19 of 2001 dated 9th September,

2003 which is set out hereinbelow;

"The respondents are directed to promote the petitioners to the post of Security Officer in E-2 Grade as they have been selected on the basis of written test. Such order should

be passed within fortnight after reopening of this Court with effect from the date on which other six petitioners in W.P.No.2566 of 1997 have been given promotion."

Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to be

granted promotion, notionally, with effect from the

same date as the promotions granted to the six

petitioners in W.P.No.2566 of 1997.

The instant writ application has been filed

claiming that the notional promotion was granted

to him by the respondents only with effect from the

year 2000 and that he ought to have been granted

promotion from 1996 being the date on which the

petitioners in W.P.No.2566 of 1997 were granted

promotion. The report by way of affidavit has

brought on record an office order dated 24th June,

2014 to the following effect;

"In compliance with the directives of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.4246 of 2004, the following Sr. Security Inspectors, who have already retired from the services from BCCL are hereby notionally promoted as Security Officer in E2 grade with notional seniority and Rational fixation of pay at par with those of the same batch of 1994 who had been promoted/appointed as Security Officer in E2 Grade vide order no.CIL:C5A(i): 50254/Security/30 dt. 20.04.2000, i.e. w.e.f. the date their immediate junior S/Shri M. S. Ladole and others were promoted in 1996 as Security Officer with posting in various subsidiaries vide office order no.CIL/C5A(i)50272/6 dt. 4th April, 1996."

It is not clear from the order as to whether

the petitioners have been granted notional

promotion from the year 1996 or from the year

2000.

This Court wishes to know from BCCL as

to whether the petitioner has been granted

notional promotion and benefits from the year

2000 or from the year 1996. This Court also

wishes to know with effect from which date six

petitioners in the said W.P.No.2566 of 1997 were

in fact granted promotion.

The BCCL shall file a further report by way

of affidavit upon prior service to the counsel for the

petitioner.

Let this matter stand adjourned and be

listed on 5th March, 2021.

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)