M.P. Bansal vs Union Of India & Ors.
2013 Latest Caselaw 249 Del

*         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


%                                          Date of Decision: January 16, 2013


+                              W.P.(C) 5695/2011


          M.P. BANSAL                                           ..... Petitioner
                               Represented by: Mr.Shrigopal Aggarwal,
                                              Advocate
                      versus

          UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                        ..... Respondents
                        Represented by: Mr.R.V.Sinha, Advocate

          CORAM:
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
          HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner was holding substantive appointment as an Assistant Chemical Examiner. The next promotional post was that of Chemical Examiner Grade-II.

2. Petitioner superannuated from service on December 31, 2006. Pertaining to the vacancy year 2004-05, DPC was held on May 22, 2008.

3. As per rules in force, eligible officers notwithstanding they had superannuated as of the year 2004-05, were considered.

4. The petitioner filed an O.A. before the Tribunal praying that since the DPC which met on May 22, 2008 made recommendations and drew up the panel for vacancy year 2004-05 in which year the petitioner was in service, he should be promoted as Chemical Examiner Grade-II with retrospective effect.

W.P.(C) 5695/2011 page 1 of 3

5. Relief was declined by the Tribunal and needless to state the Tribunal rightly did so in view of the authoritative pronouncement of a Division Bench of this Court in the opinion reported as 2011 (176) DLT 247 UOI vs. Vijender Singh.

6. Limited show cause notice was issued in the writ petition as per order dated August 09, 2011 noting that the prayer made was that the petitioner would be at least entitled to pay in the Grade applicable to the post of Chemical Examiner Grade-II with effect from September 23, 2005 for the reason the petitioner was officiating in the promotional post till he superannuated from service.

7. It appears that this aspect of the matter was not pressed before the Tribunal, however we note that in the Original Application filed by the petitioner, in para 4.10(a) he has pleaded that with effect from September 23, 2005 he was discharging functions of the promotional post which fact be pleaded could be gathered from the office order dated June 13, 2006. While pleading the grounds, as per ground 5.1(b) said assertion has been repeated.

8. However, we find that assertion of fact to be incorrect inasmuch as the office order dated September 23, 2005 on basis whereof the petitioner pleads to be discharging functions of the promotional post would reveal that the petitioner was directed by the said order to take over charge of the CRCL Extension Lab at IGI Airport from Mr.P.K.Aggarwal and to hand over charge of his post to Sh.A.K.Singh. The office order would record that Sh.P.K.Aggarwal was functioning as the Assistant Chemical Examiner CRCL Extension Laboratory, IGI Airport and not as the Chemical Examiner. Order dated June 30, 2006 simply confers powers upon the petitioner as Head of Office for purposes of financial obligation.

W.P.(C) 5695/2011 page 2 of 3

9. It appears that the petitioner is confusing his working as Head of Office at IGI Airport with a promotional post.

10. This is not so.

11. The writ petition is dismissed.

12. No costs.

(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG) JUDGE

(VEENA BIRBAL) JUDGE JANUARY 16, 2013 srb

W.P.(C) 5695/2011 page 3 of 3