S.L. SONI versus STATE OF M.P. AND ANR.

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 41 · Decided: 08-05-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

-
-
S.L. SONI 
A 
v. 
STATE OF M.P. AND ANR. 
MAY 8, 1995 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] 
B 
Service Law : 
M.P. F-0rest Service (Recrnitment) Rules, 1977: 
Promotion-Claim fo,-Objective consideration by High Power Com-
C 
mittee-Committee's finding that candidate was unfit for promotion on 
merits-Held not a fit case for intelference by Supreme Court. 
A High Level Committee considered the claim of all eligible persons 
for promotion as Assistant Conservator of Forest in accordance with the D 
criteria prescribed hy M.P. Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1977 and 
rejected the appellant's claim on the ground that he was not fit for 
promotion. The M.P. Administrative Tribunal directed that the appellant's 
case be considered without taking into consideration the uncommunicated 
adverse remarks against the appellant. Accordingly the Committee recon-
sidered the matter but found the appellant not eligible for promotion. 
E 
In appeal to this Court on the question whether the appellant's claim 
for promotion was considered in accordance with Rules: 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : A high level committee objectively considered the claim and 
found that the appellant was not fit for promotion on merits. On perusal 
of the proceedings of the Committee, the Court"is satisfied about this. 
Therefore, it is not a case warranting this Court's interference. [43-D] 
F 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5656 of G 
1995. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 5.3.93 of the Madhya Pradesh 
Administrative Tribunal, Bhopal in T.A.No. 1794 of 1988. 
L.K. Pandey for the Appellant. 
41 
H 
42 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A 
Sakesh Kumar, G3utam Bose and Mr. S.K. Agnihotri for the Respon-
B 
c 
dents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Leave granted. 
This appeal arises against the order of the M.P. Admn. Tribunal, 
Bhopal Bench in Transferred Application No. 1794/88 dated 5.3.1993. The 
only question in this appeal is whether the claim for promotion as Assistant 
Forest Conservator was considered in accordance with Rules. We have 
called for and perused the record. A High Level Committee, consisting of 
a Member of the Public Service Commission as Chairman, Secretary to the 
Government, Forest Department and Principal Chief Conservator of 
Forests as members, was constituted to consider the claims of all eligible 
persons for promotion as Assistant/Conservator of Forest. The criteria 
adopted by the Committee was in accordance with the M.P. Forest Service 
D (Recruitment) Rules, 1977, (for short, 'the Rules'). The zone of considera-
tion was five times the number of vacancies. Thereby there was wide 
chances for many to be considered. Only officers with a minimum of 8 years 
of service and confirmed in the cadre of Ranger were considered. The 
selection was based on merits with due regard to seniority. The merit was 
E assessed on the basis of recorded annual confidential reports of the officers 
for the; previous five years to the year of consideration. The yardstick of 
merit adopted was that average assessment of last five years C.Rs. should 
be above "good". Integrity should be beyond doubt. In the case of officer 
against whom departmental enquiry was in progress, assessment was made 
without prejudice to the result of the said enquiry which was placed in a 
F 
sealed cover to be opened after the departmental enquiry proceedings are 
completed. 
Based thereon, the claims were considered and initially the appellant 
was not found fit for promotion and was rejected. The Tribunal, after 
G examination of the matter, gave the following direction: 
H 
"We conclude that the D.P.C. has erred in taking into con-
sideration, the uncommunicated adverse remarks for the period 
ending March, 1978 while considering the applicant's fitness for 
promotion to the post of Asst!. Conservator of Forests. We ac-
cordingly direct that a fresh D.P.C. be constituted for evaluating 
-
-
S.L. SONI v. STATE OF M.P. 
43 
applicant's claim for promotion with retrospective effe'ct. The A 
D.P.C. shall not take into consideration the adverse remarks for 
the year ending March, 1978, otherwise, it may follow the same 
criteria for adjudging applicant's suitability for promotion as has 
been followed by the D.P.C. held in 1982. The applicant, if found 
fit, will be entitled retrospective notional promotion and seniority 
B 
from the date his juniors were promoted. For the reasons 
recovered in para 3

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.