High Court · 2025
Case Details
Learned counsel contends that after expunction of the adverse entry, the sealed cover should have been opened, and the petitioner ought to have been considered for promotion with effect from 16.11.1993. It is further submitted that the petitioner sought information regarding his promotion under the RTI Act. In response, he was informed that the DPC convened on 19.04.2001 could not consider his case for promotion as the censure entry was still in existence at that time. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of the Court towards towards Annexure No. 7, wherein it is stated that a similarly situated employee, Smt. Usha Birji, then Principal of Rajkiya Polytechnic, was promoted with effect from
23.11.1993. It is further submitted that the present writ petition was filed in 2013, and despite repeated opportunities, no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. Thus, the contents of the writ petition along with annexures are undisputed. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of written instructions, submitted that the petitioner’s case was duly considered by the DPC on 16.11.1993, but due to the censure entry, his case was placed under sealed cover. Subsequently, another DPC meeting was held on 19.04.2001, but since the censure entry had not been expunged by that time, his case could not be considered. The censure entry was expunged on 15.06.2001. However, learned Standing Counsel could not assign any reason as to why the petitioner’s case was not considered for promotion after expunction of the adverse entry despite repeated representations. Perused the record. A perusal of the record, it appears that the initial DPC meeting was held on 16.11.1993. Due to the censure entry, the petitioner’s case was placed in the sealed cover. The recommendations made by the DPC indicate that the petitioner was placed in the “excellent” category. No reason has been assigned by the State for not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion after the expunction of the adverse entry. The minutes of DPC held on 16.11.1993 are extracted below:- " ददनननक 16.11.1993 कक आयकजजत सदमदत कक बबठक मम चयन सदमदत दनरन यह सनसततदत कक गई दक " शश गतरदशप जसनह कक समग सकवन अदभलकखख पर दवदनरकपरननत उनहम उतम शकणश मम वगरकक त दकयन थन और इस शतर कक अधशन उनहम सनयतक दनदकशक, पनदवजधक दशकन कक पद पर पदकनदत दकयक जननक कक सनसततदत कक थश दक शश गतरदशप जसनह कक दवरद वतरमनन मम पचजलत अनतशनसदनक कनयरवनहश मम उनहम पपणरतत दनदरष पनयन जनयक दकनतत शश गतरदशप जसनह उक दवभनगशय कनयरवनहश मम दणणणत दकयक गयक हब। अतत उक पतनरदवचनर कक पररणनम सवरप शश गतरदशप जसनह कक सनयतक दनदकशक, पनदवजधक दशकन कक पद पर पदकनदत हकतत उपयतक नहह पनयन गयन।" The Supreme Court in the case of "R.K. Singh v. State of U.P., 1991 Supp (2) SCC 126", has held that once the adverse entries awarded to the appellant were expunged, the appellant is entitled for selection grade from the date on which he was eligible for grant of selection grade. The relevant para of the judgment is extracted below:- "2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that this appeal must succeed. There is no dispute that during the pendency of this appeal the appellant's representation against the adverse entries has been allowed and these entries have been expunged from his service record. Since the adverse entries were expunged the State Government by its order dated January 24, 1991 granted Selection Grade to the appellant with effect from the date he takes over charge. We fail to appreciate the view taken by the State Government. Once the adverse entries awarded to the appellant were expunged the appellant is entitled to Selection Grade with effect from January 1, 1986 the date on which he was eligible for grant of Selection Grade. We, accordingly, allow the appeal, set aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal and modify the order of the State Government dated January 24, 1991 and direct that the appellant shall be treated in Selection Grade with effect from January 1, 1986 and he will be entitled to all other consequential benefits with effect from that date. As regards appellant's further promotion, he will be considered for promotion in accordance with Rules." In this case also admittedly the adverse entry was expunged. Due to this adverse entry, the petitioner's case though was considered in the DPC held on 1993, however, was kept in sealed cover. In the recommendation of the DPC, the petitioner was placed under excellent category, however, he was not promoted on account of pending adverse censure entry. Now, when the adverse entry has been expunged, the petitioner is entitled for promotion from the date he became eligible for promotion. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner’s case for promotion to the post of Joint Director, Technical Education, with effect from the date he became eligible for promotion. The respondents are further directed to pay the petitioner the arrears of salary and pension as per the decision taken in compliance with the observations made herein. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is allowed. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 R.C. RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Learned counsel contends that after expunction of the adverse entry, the sealed cover should have been opened, and the petitioner ought to have been considered for promotion with effect from 16.11.1993. It is further submitted that the petitioner sought information regarding his promotion under the RTI Act. In response, he was informed that the DPC convened on 19.04.2001 could not consider his case for promotion as the censure entry was still in existence at that time. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of the Court towards towards Annexure No. 7, wherein it is stated that a similarly situated employee, Smt. Usha Birji, then Principal of Rajkiya Polytechnic, was promoted with effect from
23.11.1993. It is further submitted that the present writ petition was filed in 2013, and despite repeated opportunities, no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. Thus, the contents of the writ petition along with annexures are undisputed. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of written instructions, submitted that the petitioner’s case was duly considered by the DPC on 16.11.1993, but due to the censure entry, his case was placed under sealed cover. Subsequently, another DPC meeting was held on 19.04.2001, but since the censure entry had not been expunged by that time, his case could not be considered. The censure entry was expunged on 15.06.2001. However, learned Standing Counsel could not assign any reason as to why the petitioner’s case was not considered for promotion after expunction of the adverse entry despite repeated representations. Perused the record. A perusal of the record, it appears that the initial DPC meeting was held on 16.11.1993. Due to the censure entry, the petitioner’s case was placed in the sealed cover. The recommendations made by the DPC indicate that the petitioner was placed in the “excellent” category. No reason has been assigned by the State for not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion after the expunction of the adverse entry. The minutes of DPC held on 16.11.1993 are extracted below:- " ददनननक 16.11.1993 कक आयकजजत सदमदत कक बबठक मम चयन सदमदत दनरन यह सनसततदत कक गई दक " शश गतरदशप जसनह कक समग सकवन अदभलकखख पर दवदनरकपरननत उनहम उतम शकणश मम वगरकक त दकयन थन और इस शतर कक अधशन उनहम सनयतक दनदकशक, पनदवजधक दशकन कक पद पर पदकनदत दकयक जननक कक सनसततदत कक थश दक शश गतरदशप जसनह कक दवरद वतरमनन मम पचजलत अनतशनसदनक कनयरवनहश मम उनहम पपणरतत दनदरष पनयन जनयक दकनतत शश गतरदशप जसनह उक दवभनगशय कनयरवनहश मम दणणणत दकयक गयक हब। अतत उक पतनरदवचनर कक पररणनम सवरप शश गतरदशप जसनह कक सनयतक दनदकशक, पनदवजधक दशकन कक पद पर पदकनदत हकतत उपयतक नहह पनयन गयन।" The Supreme Court in the case of "R.K. Singh v. State of U.P., 1991 Supp (2) SCC 126", has held that once the adverse entries awarded to the appellant were expunged, the appellant is entitled for selection grade from the date on which he was eligible for grant of selection grade. The relevant para of the judgment is extracted below:- "2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that this appeal must succeed. There is no dispute that during the pendency of this appeal the appellant's representation against the adverse entries has been allowed and these entries have been expunged from his service record. Since the adverse entries were expunged the State Government by its order dated January 24, 1991 granted Selection Grade to the appellant with effect from the date he takes over charge. We fail to appreciate the view taken by the State Government. Once the adverse entries awarded to the appellant were expunged the appellant is entitled to Selection Grade with effect from January 1, 1986 the date on which he was eligible for grant of Selection Grade. We, accordingly, allow the appeal, set aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal and modify the order of the State Government dated January 24, 1991 and direct that the appellant shall be treated in Selection Grade with effect from January 1, 1986 and he will be entitled to all other consequential benefits with effect from that date. As regards appellant's further promotion, he will be considered for promotion in accordance with Rules." In this case also admittedly the adverse entry was expunged. Due to this adverse entry, the petitioner's case though was considered in the DPC held on 1993, however, was kept in sealed cover. In the recommendation of the DPC, the petitioner was placed under excellent category, however, he was not promoted on account of pending adverse censure entry. Now, when the adverse entry has been expunged, the petitioner is entitled for promotion from the date he became eligible for promotion. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner’s case for promotion to the post of Joint Director, Technical Education, with effect from the date he became eligible for promotion. The respondents are further directed to pay the petitioner the arrears of salary and pension as per the decision taken in compliance with the observations made herein. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is allowed. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 R.C. RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench