WPSB/315/2020
2021 Latest Caselaw 2305 UK

                      Office Notes,
                   reports, orders or
SL.                 proceedings or
         Date                                           COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No                   directions and
                   Registrar's order
                    with Signatures
      08.07.2021                        WPSB No. 315 of 2020

                                        Hon'ble Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, C.J.
                                        Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma, J.

Mr. Siddhartha Sah, learned counsel for the petitioners.

Mr. B.P.S. Mer, learned Brief Holder for the State / respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

Mr. Ravi Babulkar, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

Dr. Kartikey Hari Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No. 5.

The learned counsel for respondent

No. 3 informs this Court that prior to the

judgment dated 14.06.2018, the petitioner

No. 1, Dr. S.P. Mital, had retired on

31.12.2017, petitioner No. 2, Dr. Rakesh

Verma, had retired on 14.11.2017 and

petitioner No. 3, Dr. Rajni Sinha, had

retired on 02.02.2018. Therefore,

although, this Court had directed the State

to complete the exercise of promoting

persons under the CAS scheme, by

judgment dated 14.06.2018, the benefit of the said judgment could not be given to

the three petitioners mentioned

hereinabove. He further submits that,

according to the CAS scheme, as adopted

by the State, it is clearly stated that a

person should be in service for being

granted the benefit of the Career

Advancement Promotion. However, as

petitioner No. 1 to 3 were not in service,

the benefit of the Scheme could not be

extended to them.

Admittedly, petitioner No. 4, Dr. V.K.

Dikshit, did not retire till 09.05.2019,

according to the judgment dated

14.06.2018, the exercise for promoting

people under the CAS Scheme was to be

completed within a period of ten weeks

from the said date. However, it is unclear,

as to why, the judgment dated 14.06.2018,

was not implemented by the State.

Consequently, due to the inaction and omission on the part of the State, the

petitioner No. 4, Dr. Dikshit, had retired on

09.05.2019.

Therefore, this Court directs the

learned counsel for the State to clarify the

reason, as to why the judgment dated

14.06.2018, passed by learned Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court, has not been

implemented.

Learned counsel for the State seeks

time to seek further instructions.

List this case on 16.08.2021.

(Alok Kumar Verma, J.)(Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, C.J.) 08.07.2021 08.07.2021 Negi