Single-judge Bench allowed the State to disallow promotion of petitioners as they could not prove the mandatory five years of regular service on the feeder post, dismissing their writ petitions for cancellation of promotion orders.
Petitioners deprived of promotion due to non-completion of requisite five years service.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
L
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURTOFCHHA’ITISGARH AT BILASPUR
W.P.(S) N0.
PETITIONER
€739;
/2o1g
Ganga Prasad Verma, S/o. Tekram Verma, aged about 45 years, R/o. Qtr.No. 7/5;TribalColony,Mission Road, Korba, PoliceStationRamput I.T.I., Post Office I.T.I. Rampur, District Korba, Chhattisgarh
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS
State of Chhattisgarh, through: Principal Secretary, Department of Scheduled Caste/Schedule Tribe Development, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Police Station Civil Lines, ‘Laipur, Head Post Office, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh Commissioner, Department of Scheduled Caste/Schedule Tribe Development, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Police Station Civil Lines, Raipur, Head Post Office, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
Collector (Tribal Development), Korba, Police StationandPostOffice Rampur I.T.I., Korba,DistrictKorba, Chhattisgarh
Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Korba, Police Station and Post Office Rampur I.T.I., Korba, District Korba, Chliattisgarh
WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE226OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
—s:z
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WP(S) No.5545 of 2012
PETITIONERS
Manoj Tamboli & others
-Versus-
RESPONDENTS: State of Chhattisgarh & others
AND
WP(S) No.5343 of 2012
PETITIONER
Ganga Prasad Verma
—Versus-
RESPONDENTS:
State of Chhattisgarh & others
Present
Shri Manoj Paranjpe with Shri Vickram Dixit, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Rakesh Jha, Govt. Advocate for the State.
Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.
ORAL ORDER
(4—10-2013)
{a
it was for the respondents to consider the record and pass appropriate order and once the order of promotion was issued, it could not have been cancened by the respondents for no fault of the petitioners.
Barve
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the promotion orders issued to petitioners were valid when they lacked the mandatory five years of regular service on the feeder post.
Whether the cancellation of the promotion orders was justified due to the petitioners' ineligibility.
Whether the absence of a gradation list for Class-IV employees prevents the respondents from cancelling a promotion order.
Manoj Tamboli & others
Ganga Prasad Verma
State of Chhattisgarh
Prashant Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
