Dismissed

Harishankar Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC11 Jul 2013WA/106/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal challenged the dismissal of a petition seeking promotion to Audit Officer. The Division Bench dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant was ineligible due to two bad character entries and a pending departmental inquiry that resulted in punishment. The court affirmed the single judge's order. No substantial order other than disposal.

What the court decided

AI extract

Harishankar Singh Vs State Of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2013)

¶1

([/ #61) / N

¶2

@iwigmn ch

¶3

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH^AT BILASPUR (C.G.) Writ Appeal No. 10% of 2013

¶4

APPELLANT] Petitioner

¶5

Harishankar Singh, S/o Late Shri Bhanupratap

¶6

Singh, aged about 69 years, R/o Ganesh Mandir Road, Mother Teresa Ward, Jagdalpur, RS.— Jagdalpur, District—Bastar (C.G.)

¶7

RESPONDENTS

¶8

:1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Chief Secretary, Co— operative Department, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

The Registrar, Co~operative Societies Chhattisgarh, Krishak Nagar, Labhandi, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Assistant Registrar, Co—operative Societies, Dantewacla, District— Dantewada (C.G.)

¶10

The Co—operative Commissioner and Registrar, Co—operative Societies, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal (M.P.)

¶11

The Registrar, Co—operative Societies, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal (M.P.)

¶12

State of Madhya Pradesh, through the Secretary, Co— operative Department, Bhopal (M.P.)

¶13

(C.G.)WRIT^{APPEALUNDERSECTION2SUB—SECTION}

¶14

(1)^{OFTHECHHATTISGARHHIGHCOURTS(APPEALTO} DIVISION BENCH) ACT,²⁰⁰⁶

¶15

Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 11 01 2013 passed^{1nWritPetitionNO} 1961 of 2003 by the learned Single Bench of this Hon’ble Court

¶16

BIGH^COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶17

CORAM: HON‘BLE SHRI YATINDRA SINGH, C.J. HON’BLE SHRI PRITINKER DIWAKER, J.

¶18

Writ Appeal No. 106 of 2013

¶19

Appellant : Harishankar Singh ' VERSUS Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others Wri ea nder Sec io 2 Cla se of hha is rh H' Sourt (Appeal to Divi§ion Bench) Agt, 2006

¶20

Appearance:^{ShriHarishankarSingh,} Appellant in person. Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Additional Advocate General for the State.

¶21

JUDGEMEN1

¶22

(^{11‘“July,2013)}

¶23

This is a writ appeal against the order of the single judge dated 11.01.2013 dismissing Writ Petition-1961 of 2003 filed by Shri Harishankar Singh (the Appellant).

¶24

THE FACTS

¶25

The Appellant was appointed as Cooperative Extension Officer on 15.04.1968. He was promoted as Senior Cooperative lnspector on 01.04.1985. Thereafter, a seniority list has been published. on 01 04.1998 in which, the Appellant was at serial number26. d.

¶26

A Departmental Promotion Committee was convened on 23.12.1997 (the 1997-DPC) for promoting the Senior Cooperative Inspector to the post^{ofAuditOfficer.} The results of the 1997-DPC were announced on 25.02.1999 and 17 Cooperative Inspectors were promoted to the post of Audit Officers. However, the Appellant was not promoted, though some of his juniors were promoted.

¶27

A charge—sheet was served on the Appellant on 10.07.1998 for which reply was given on 17.03.1999. Thereafter, a Departmental Enquiry (the DE) was conducted and during pendency of this DE, second DPC was held on 17.06.1999 (the 1999-DPC). This time, as the DE was pending against the Appellant, his result was kept in a sealed cover.

¶28

(57/

¶29

In the depattmenta! proceedings, the Appeilant was awarded puniShment^{ofcensureon28.07.2006.}

¶30

filed an 6. Aggrieved by^theaforesaid punishment,^{theAppellanthas} appeal which was also dismissed on 07.01.2008. Thereafter, the Appeilant tiled^{WritPetition-1 961of2003foradirectionthat} he^shouidbe i .r. promoted^w.e.f. 25.02.1999, when his juniors were promoted. It was dismissed on^11.01.2013. Hence, the present^appeai.

¶31

THE DECISION 7. We have heard^{ShriHarishankarSingh} personaliy Bhaduri, Additional^{AdvocateGeneraifortheState.}

¶32

The proceedings of 1997-DPC are not on record, whereas. the proceedings^{of1999-DPCareontherecord.} 9. The 1999-DPC,^{areontherecord.} lt is mentioned^{thatforconsidering} in confidential reports of^lastfive years^{wasconsideredand} promotion, 'IT' entries. There are the last five years,^{thereshouidnotbetwoormore} other criteria^{aisomentionedtherein,buttheyarenotrelevanthere.}

¶33

record. However, in the 10. The proceedings^{of1997-DPCarenoton} return to the writ petition tiled by the Appellant, the respondents^had stated that there^{wassimilarcriterionandinthelastfiveyearsaperson} should not^have Tr' entry in two or more years. There is no reason^to disbelieve that this criterion was not there, while considering the promotions^{inthe1997-DPC.}

¶34

The Appeilant^was given 'IT entry in’ the year 1994 as well as 1995. The single judge^{hasrecordedafindingthatthiswascommunicatedto} the Appellant.^There is no illegality in the same. ln view of the^same, in the there was^no illegality in denying^the promotion^{totheAppeilant} ' ‘ 1997-DPC.

¶35

153

¶36

There was a departmental enquiry against the Appellant when 1999—DPC was held and^{hisresultwaskeptinasealed.Ultimately,the} punishment^{wasalsoawarded.} His appeai against the punishment^was also dismissed. ln View of the same,^{heisnotentitledtobe} promotedⁱⁿ the 1999-DPC.

¶37

ln view of above, the^{writappealhasnomerit.} lt is dismissed.

¶38

A w. Sd/Chief Justice padma

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

J. Sd/Pritinker^Diwaker 1

¶41

l Judge

Harishankar Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Harishankar Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Singh Thakur Vs State Of C.g.

Chain Singh Pendre Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Shahdeo Singh Vs Union Of India And Ors.

Chandramouleshwar Singh and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Prem Mohan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bisaru Baiga Vs State of Chhattisgarh