The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WPC(OA) No.1049 of 2016 Dhrubananda Ghadei …. Petitioner Mr. A. Rath, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties State Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No 3. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Decision
ORDER 31.10.2023 Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia with the following prayer. “In view of the facts stated in Para-6 above, the applicant prays the following relief(s):- (i) To direct the respondent No.1 to quash impugned order under Annexure-4 with regard to Sl.No.4 (Santosh Kumar Samal) treating the same as illegal, unjust and bad in law; (ii) deemed fit and proper which would give relief to the applicant. To pass any other order/iorders, directions as would be <AND/OR (iii) To consider the applicants and accordingly promotion be given to him from the date 13.06.2014, his junior Sri S.K. Samal was given promotion and to give all service benefits including the future service benefits on the said basis.= 3.1. It is contended that even though the Petitioner during relevant time was eligible to get the benefit of promotion to the rank of Revenue Inspector, but his case was not considered while considering the claim of // 2 // his junior who was extended with such promotion vide order dt.13.06.2014 under Annexure-4. 3.2. It is contended that since the Petitioner was otherwise eligible to get the benefit of promotion, non consideration of the same while extending such benefit to his junior is illegal and not sustainable in the eye of law. 4. Basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit filed by Opp. Party No.3, it is submitted that Petitioner’s case was not considered while considering the case of Opp. Party No.4, as the CCR for the relevant period was not available. It is further contended that subsequently on availability of the CCRs, the petitioner has got the benefit of promotion to the rank of Revenue Inspector vide order dt.28.05.2016 under Annexure-11. 5. To the aforesaid stand of the learned Addl. Government Advocate, Mr. Rath, learned counsel contended that since the petitioner was otherwise eligible and his case was not considered due to non- availability of CCR, no fault lies with the Petitioner for such non-consideration of his claim. He further contended that as revealed from the communication issued by the Tahasildar, Telkoi-Opp. Party No.3 vide Annexures-7 & 8, the CCRs for the relevant period was already furnished by him. It is accordingly contended that since the CCR of the petitioner was already forwarded by the Tahasildar, Telkoi, as revealed from Annexures-7 & 8, there was no occasion on the part of Opp. Party No.2 not to consider the case of the Page 2 of 4 // 3 // Petitioner for his promotion to the rank of Revenue Inspector while giving such promotion in favour of Opp. Party No.4 vide order dt.13.06.2014 under Annexure-4. 5.1. Mr. Rath, learned counsel further contended that in the notification issued by the Government in the G.A Department dt.18.07.2005 under Annexure-10, it has been clearly held that if an officer is not promoted and subsequently he was found eligible to get the benefit of promotion on receipt of the CCR, he shall not be deprived of any service benefit that have been extended to their immediate juniors promoted earlier. It is accordingly contended that since due to the fault of the Opp. Parties, the Petitioner could not get the benefit of promotion along with Opp. Party No.4 in the year 2014 and he got the said benefit only in terms of office order dt.28.05.2016 under Annexure-11, the Petitioner is eligible and entitled to get the benefit of promotion from the date Opp. Party No.4 got the said benefit vide order dt.13.06.2014 under Annexure-4. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials available on record, it is found that the claim of the petitioner for his promotion to the rank of Revenue Inspector could not be considered due to non-availability of CCR for the relevant period and the said fact is clearly admitted by Opp. Party No.3 in para 7 of the counter. 6.1. As further found from the communication issued by the Tahasildar, Telkoi under Annexures-7 & 8, the CCRs of the Petitioner for the period from 2009-10 to 2012-13 was Page 3 of 4 // 4 // already communicated to Opp.Party No.2 for consideration of the Petitioner’s claim. 6.2. In view of such position and placing reliance on the circular issued by the G.A Deptt. on 18.07.2005 under Annexure-10 and the fact that the Petitioner has got the benefit of promotion vide order dt. 28.05.2016, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, directs Opp. Party No.2 to conduct a review DPC with regard to the claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of promotion to the rank of Revenue Inspector from the date his juniors got the said benefit. Such a review DPC shall be conducted by Opp. Party No.2 within a period of six(6) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On such conduct of the review DPC, if it is found that the Petitioner was otherwise eligible and entitled to get the benefit of promotion, then necessary order be passed to extend such benefit from the date Opp. Party No.4 got similar benefit vide order dt.13.06.2014 vide Annexure-4. 6.3. In view of the circular issued by the G.A. Deptt. under Annexure-10, the petitioner will also be eligible and entitled to get all service and financial benefits as due and admissible to him. This Court directs Opp. Party No.2 to extend the benefit as due and admissible within a further period of two(2) months from the date of holding of the review DPC. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa, cuttack Date: 01-Nov-2023 18:17:47 sangita This Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Page 4 of 4