Bhom Singh Taxak vs The State Trading Corporation Of ...
1998 Latest Caselaw 1035 Del

JUDGMENT

K. Ramamoorthy, J.

1. The Petitioner who was working as Deputy Marketing Manager Grade-II, filed the writ petition claiming the following reliefs:

i) To quash the seniority List dated 03.04.1989 (Annexure IV, be quashed and the Respondent No. 1 be directed to re draw the Seniority List of Deputy Marketing Manager Grade-I, to be based only on the basis of the length of Service in the Managerial Cadre, or from the date of entry into the Managerial Cadre (Annexure III) ;

ii) Quash the S.T.C. (Officers') Promotion and Transfer Policy, 1985, and Modification in the said Policy by virtue of Circular dated 30.12.1988 in view of the above submissions made (Annexure III);

iii) Quash the promotion order dated 25.06.1990, 31.12.1990, 10.02.1992 in view of the submissions made in the writ petition. (Annexure VI).

iv) To assign the correct Seniority and Promotion to the petitioner by directing the First Respondent and granting prayer (i) to (iii) of the prayer in the present writ petition as also grant all consequential benefits arising out of the prayer made above.

2. During the pendency of the writ petition, on 30.10.1996, the first respondent STC on the basis of this order, the petitioner was promoted as Marketing Manager. The petitioner filed CM No. 2311 of 1997 praying for the following reliefs:

a) Direct the respondent to promote the petitioner as Marketing Manager w.e.f. 01.11.1989 just above; Shri D.A. Suri and or such other persons and also to such other posts which the petitioner would have earned after 01.11.1989 till his date of retirement or which his junior arc holding on the date of his retirement;

b) Pass order for such other consequential relief which the petitioner is entitled to as deemed fit by this court;

3. In the petition in para 4 the petitioner has stated thus:

That the petitioner has since received a letter from the Personnel Division in the office of the First respondent wherein the personal manager on instructions from the Competent authority has intimated the petitioner that the First Respondent has decided to promote the petitioner w.e.f. 01.11.1989 i.e. the day when the Junior of the petitioner namely, Shri D.A. Suri was promoted as Marketing Manager, at the same time, the respondent was also pleased to intimate that no financial benefit will be admissible to the petitioner till 01.04.1996.

4. In para of the petition the petitioner had stated:

The present application is moved with a view to obtain the relief of promotion to the Post of Marketing Manager w.e.f. 01.11.1989 alongwith other consequential benefits including Seniority, further promotion etc. from 01.11.1989 which the petitioner would have earned. If this Hon'ble Court comes to the conclusion that the petitioner was entitled to such other promoted posts before his date of retirement i.e. 31.3.1997, that may also be ordered alongwith consequential benefits if so deemed fit, in the interest of justice and equity.

5. The CM came up for hearing before this court on 07.11.1997. After hearing the parties this court passed the following order:

CM No. 2311/97 in CW No. 1200/92

Counsel for the respondent seeks further time for filing the reply. Request allowed. Let it be done within four weeks with a copy to counsel for the petitioner, who may file rejoinder, if any, within four weeks thereafter.

Respondents are directed to give promotion to the petitioner provided he does not claim the arrears and withdraw the petition. Counsel for the petitioner contends that for no fault of the petitioner, he was made to retire in his substantive capacity instead of being promoted. In this view of the matter, let respondent also consider the question of payment of arrears if promotion was done to the petitioner. Matter be listed on 19th January, 1998.

6. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner that this court had issued direction to the first respondent to give promotion to him as Marketing Manager and give him consequential benefits. The learned Senior counsel for the first respondent Mr. A.K. Sikri, submitted that the petitioner was working in the Local Cadre and as per the rules in force the promotional avenues were different for Local Cadre and All

India Cadre. Promotions had given to the officers who are in the All India Cadre and therefore, the petitioner cannot have any grievance. The first respondent give option to the officers working in Local Cadre to come to the All India Cadre. In January 1989, the Petitioner gave his option to come to the All India Cadre. The next promotion of the post from Deputy Manager Grade I to Marketing Manager. Be fore Deputy Manager Grade I is considered for promotion as Marketing Manager he should have put in 11 years of combined services as Deputy Manager Grade-I and Deputy Manager Grade-II. The petitioner has not completed 11 years. According to the learned Senior counsel the office has offered to given excellent promotion on the strength of outstanding Grade which are recorded in the ACR. The petitioner had not opted that Grade outstanding and therefore, he cannot claim his promotion.

7. In view of the order passed by the first respondent on 30.10.1996, it is clear that the petitioner was eligible to be considered for promotion and that fact cannot be disputed. The first respondent had, therefore, considered the claim of the petitioner, It is not open to the first respondent to effect any condition to the order. Once the order of promotion is issued the promotee would be entitled to all the consequential benefits. In law it shall not be open to the first respondent to say that the petitioner would not be entitled to any financial benefits till 01.04.1996. The petitioner by virtue of the order of promotion would be entitled to all consequential benefits with effect from 01.11.1989. Mr. V. Shekhar, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once the petitioner had been promoted w.e.f. 01.11.19989 it cannot be contended by the first respondent that he was not qualified to be promoted.

8. The petitioner had further claimed promotion from the post of Marketing Manager to Chief Marketing Manager. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. V. Shekhar, the petitioner was also graded outstanding and the petitioner was unjustifiably deny his due promotion.

9. Mr. A.K. Sikri, the learned Senior Counsel for the first respondent submitted that if the petitioner had been graded outstanding his case would positively be considered for promotion and appropriate order will be passed and the first respondent has no objection to that course. The petitioner has since retired from service on 31.03.1997, if the case of the petitioner had been considered in accordance with law, he would have been promoted as Chief Marketing Manager. When his junior Surinder Kumar was promoted as Chief Marketing Manager, the petitioner cannot be denied his due promotion. Accordingly, the first respondent is directed to pay all monetary benefits w.e.f. 01.11.1989 to the petitioner, the arrears shall be paid to the petitioner on or before 31.01.1999. The first respondent shall consider the case of the petitioner for promotion as Chief Marketing Manager on the basis of his grading and if the petitioner had been graded as outstanding, the petitioner shall be given promotion as Chief Marketing Manager and the petitioner shall be paid over all monetary benefits consequence thereto. The first respondent shall pass appropriate order in this behalf on at before 31.01.1999.

10. The writ petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.