Orissa High Court
Sullava Chandra Patro vs State Of Odisha & Ors on 8 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.23801 of 2022
Sullava Chandra Patro .... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite Parties
CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
08.12.2022
Order No
02. I.A. No.15102 of 2022
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. This is an application for modification/recalling of order
dtd.30.09.2022.
3. Considering the grounds taken in I.A., the order dtd.30.09.2022
is recalled.
4. I.A. is disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
03. W.P.(C) No. 23801 of 2022
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has filed this
application seeking direction to the opposite parties to give him
promotion to the post of Section Officer and all consequential
benefits be extended to the petitioner, taking into consideration the
// 2 //
circular dated 18.02.1994 and judgment of the apex Court in the
case of Union of India v. K.V. Janakiraman, AIR 1991 SC 2010.
3. Moot question involves if a promotion of employee can be
withheld for indefinite period on the premises of pendency of
vigilance proceeding over a period of decades.
4. This Court considering such situation has already settled the
position of law keeping the sealed cover promotion aspect in view
of pendency of the Disciplinary Proceeding and/or Vigilance
Proceeding for decades becomes bad.
5. Fact involving the case reveals that there is disciplinary
proceeding against the petitioner and on the self-same allegations,
the vigilance proceeding pending in the court of Special Judge
(Vigilance), Jeypore in Vigilance G.R. Case No.14 of 2014(V).
Involving the allegation against the petitioner, it appears the
Vigilance Proceeding initiated in the year 2014. However the said
vigilance case is yet to be disposed of. Pleading also further made
clear that Disciplinary Proceeding initiated against the petitioner is
pending since 2016 and promotion of the Petitioner was kept in
Sealed Cover till finalization of the Departmental Proceeding &
Vigilance Case (Annexure-8). In this background of case an
allegation is made that promotion of the petitioner taking effect in
the year 15.6.2022 (Annexure-7) has been kept in sealed cover only
on the premises that a vigilance proceeding involving the petitioner
is pending since 2014. For the settled position of law, this Court in
disposal of the writ petition observes, petitioner cannot suffer for
the long pendency of the vigilance proceeding. It is also not known
when the Vigilance Proceeding initiated in the year 2014 will come
to end. It is keeping in this view, this Court in disposal of the writ
// 3 //
petition directs the Collector, Rayagada (Opp. Party No.2) to give
promotion to the petitioner to the rank of Section Officer from the
date of his juniors and batchmates got such promotion. However the
promotion of the petitioner as per direction of this Court shall be
subject to the ultimate outcome in the Vigilance Proceeding.
Further it is also clarified that the promotion given to the petitioner
to the rank of Section Officer shall not confer equity in the event,
he will ultimately lose the Vigilance Proceeding. Entire exercise
shall be completed within four weeks from the date of
communication of this direction. It is also clarified that upon
promotion, petitioner shall also be entitled to all consequential
benefits.
6. Writ the above observation, the writ petition thus stands
disposed of
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Sneha
