Allowed

Alka M. Joshi v. Union of India and Anr.

Bombay HC13 Dec 2018WP/362/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court relied on a prior judgment in Writ Petition No.9279/2004 to set aside the Central Administrative Tribunal's order. It declared the petitioner's promotion to the grade of Inspector valid as of 10th June 1997. The Court restrained the respondents from reverting the petitioner, directed a DPC to be constituted within three months for promotion consideration, and ordered consequential benefi

What did the court decide?

The impugned CAT order set aside; promotion declared valid from 10.06.1997; petitioner restrained from reversion; DPC to be constituted within 3 months; DPC to consider further promotion and grant con

Alka M. Joshi Vs Union of India and Anr. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

SKN 1/3 362.05-wp.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 362 OF 2005

¶4

Alka M. Joshi. … Petitioner. V/s. Union of India and another. … Respondents.

¶5

Ms.Delilah Fernandes for the petitioner.

¶6

CORAM : A.S.OKA & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 13^th December 2018.

¶7

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per A.S.Oka, J.)

¶8

Called out for final hearing. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has tendered on record the judgment and order dated 14^th June 2018 passed in Writ Petition No.9279/2004 ( Prabha V. Nair v. Union of India ). By the impugned order dated 29^th October 2004, three Original Applications were decided. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.9279/2004 was one of the petitioners along with present petitioner in the said Original Applications. In the impugned order, it is mentioned that the Original Applications involve common question of law and fact. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that the present case will be governed by the judgment and order dated 14^th June 2018 passed in Writ Petition No.9279/2004. After having gone through the impugned judgment and order and the said judgment and order dated 14^th June 2018, we find that the petition will have to be disposed of in terms of the order dated 14^th June 2018.

¶9

SKN

¶10

2/3 362.05-wp.doc

¶11

Accordingly, for the reasons recorded in the judgment and order dated 14^th June 2018 passed in Writ Petition No.9279/2004, we pass the following order:

¶12

(i) The impugned judgment and order dated 29.10.2004 made by the Central Administrative Tribunal is hereby set aside;

¶13

(ii) We declare that the petitioner was validly promoted as Inspector with effect from 10^th June 1997 by taking into consideration the year of her passing the prescribed examination;

¶14

(iii) We declare that the clarification in letter dated 23.01.2003 will not apply to the case of the petitioner and on basis of the same or otherwise, the respondents are restrained from reverting the petitioner;

¶15

(iv) We direct that the case of the petitioner be considered for promotion by DPC to be constituted within three months from today on the basis that the promotion of the petitioner to the grade of Income Tax Officer with effect from 10^th June 1997 was legal and valid;

¶16

(v) If the DPC finds that the petitioner deserves further

¶17

SKN

¶18

3/3 362.05-wp.doc promotion, then, the petitioner to be granted all consequential benefits within a period of three months from the date of determination by the DPC. There is no question of actual promotion, since, the petitioner has already retired from service;

¶19

(vi) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms;

¶20

(vii) There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

¶21

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.) (A.S.OKA, J.)

Alka M. Joshi v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alka M. Joshi v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Eknath Sadashiv Kandpile and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kamata Prasad Tiwari Vs Union of India, through Ministry of Home Affairs and Ors.

Shri. Dhulaji Shrimant Kharat Vs State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary, Irrigation Dept. and Ors.

Sachin S.Malvankar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Smt. Anita Sunil Khairaliya Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shri Sunil Shankar Jakkal Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.