Writ petition directed to convene a Review Promotion Committee (DPC) for the petitioner's promotion case. Court directed respondents to consider pending representations and pass a speaking order, deciding the matter within four weeks.
Petition disposed with a direction to consider representations and pass a speaking order on promotion within four weeks.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4232/2021
Samay Singh Meena S/o Sh Punya Ram Meena, Aged About 45 Years, Presenty Working As Patwari Bidiyad Tehsil Parbatsar, Distt. Nagaur.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pooshan for Mr. B.P. Bohra. For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order
16/11/2021
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to convene Review DPC to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Land Records Inspector for the year 2016-17 from the date his juniors has been accorded promotion with all consequential benefits.
It is inter alia indicated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner stands at seniority No.564 in the seniority list pertaining to Patwaris (Annex.3). By order dated 27.6.2017 (Annex.5), orders for promotion have been issued, wherein, persons junior to the petitioner i.e. at seniority No.567, 568, 574, 578 and 579, have been accorded promotion, however, apparently the case of the petitioner on account of pendency of disciplinary
(2 of 2)
[CW-4232/2021]
proceedings was either not considered or recommendation qua him was placed in sealed cover.
Submissions have been made that by orders dated 20.12.2018 (Annex.1) and 7.2.2020 (Annex.2), two disciplinary proceedings pending against the petitioner, have been closed and petitioner has been exonerated qua both the charge-sheets.
Submissions have been made that despite the said fact as apparently the sealed cover procedure was not adopted, the fate of petitioner’s promotion is not known. The petitioner made representations to the respondents, however, the same have not been adverted to.
In view of the above fact situation, wherein, the petitioner has claimed that the representations made by him seeking convening of Review DPC are still pending, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider the representations made by the petitioner appropriately and pass a speaking order on the said representations. In case, the plea raised by the petitioner is accepted, to take consequential action expeditiously.
If so advised, the petitioner may file a fresh detailed representation.
It is expected of the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of this order alongwith a fresh representation, if any, is filed by the petitioner with the respondents.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J
80-Sumit/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, whose promotion was withheld pending disciplinary proceedings now closed in his favour, is entitled to a review of the Promotion Committee decision.
Whether the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representations and pass a speaking order on promotion consequentiality.
Samay Singh Meena
State Of Rajasthan
Arun Bhansali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
