N.K. Ranjan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 6570 MP

                                                          1
                          IN      THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                               ON THE 24 th OF APRIL, 2023
                                            WRIT PETITION No. 24018 of 2003

                         BETWEEN:-
                         N.K. RANJAN S/O LATE SHRI CHANDRIKA SINGH, AGED
                         ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: WORKING AS RANGE
                         ASSISTANT JOSHIPUR IN BUDHI RANGE, DISTRICT
                         (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....PETITIONER
                         (NONE)

                         AND
                         1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                               THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT IN FOREST
                               DEPARTMENT    MANTRALAYA  ,   BHOPAL
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         2.    PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,
                               BHOPAL DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         3.    CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BHOPAL CIRCLE
                               DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         4.    DIVISIONAL        FOREST               OFFICER,
                               SEHOR E(TER R ITOR IAL) DISTRICT        SEHORE
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                  .....RESPONDENTS
                         (BY SHRI SHIV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                               T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                         following:
                                                          ORDER

None for the Petitioner.

Shri Shiv Kumar Shrivastava, learned Government Advocate for the Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

4/24/2023 6:05:33 PM

State.

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Ranger in reference to the First DPC in which his juniors were considered and promoted for the first time to the post of Deputy Ranger after evolving fair and equitable criterion for evaluating the merit of the petitioner for the period he remained under suspension.

Shri Shiv Kumar Shrivastava submits that the respondent/State in their retrn has mentioned that the petitioner is a Forester. He was placed under suspension vide order dated 11.9.1990 by the D.F.O (Production), Sehore

because a Challan was filed against him on 17.7.1990 in the Court of Sessions at Vidisha. The petitioner was acquitted by the Special Judge, Vidisha vide judgment dated 26.11.1994 in Case No.2/1990 (Special), therefore, he was reinstated in service and his period of suspension was treated as on duty. When the petitioner was under suspension, some of his juniors were promoted to the post of Deputy Rangers from 1993 onwards. The petitioner's case was considered in D.P.C, which was convened on 28.29/4/1994. Thereafter, on 30.318/9/1995, for the year 1994-1995 and since the petitioner was not found fit, his name was not considered for promotion.

Petitioner has though filed a rejoinder but could not dispute the finding of the D.P.C, which had placed the petitioner under unfit list. Thus, without there being any challenge to the unfit list by producing cogent material to claim that the declaration of the petitioner as unfit was dehors the law, no indulgence can be shown in the matter.

I have perused the petition.

There is no material on record to challenge the proceedings of the D.P.C. Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

4/24/2023 6:05:33 PM

Petitioner even did not bother to amend the petition and, therefore, in absence of any such attempt being made on behalf of the petitioner to challenge the proceedings of the D.P.C, no indulgence can be shown in the matter of finding recorded by the D.P.C.

Accordingly, this writ petition fails and is dismissed.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE amit

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

4/24/2023 6:05:33 PM