LexSARABJIT SINGH versus EX. MAJOR B.D. GUPTA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
SARABJIT SINGH v. EX. MAJOR B.D. GUPTA AND ORS. AUGUST 9, 2000 [M. JAGANNADHA RAO AND DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.] Service Law : Departmental Promotion-Government Circulars-Applicability a/- Appellant promoted in the meeting of DPC held on 16.4.1999, as per Govern- ment Circular dated 28.6.61-High Court set aside the promotion holding that for the DPC Government Circular dated 1.10.1999 was applicable-All the parries conceded that for the DPC, Circular dated 1.10.99 was not applica- ble-Plea of re:.pondent that Circular dated 17.6.1960 applicable to the DPC- Held, Circular dated 17.6.1960 not applicable as the same was replaced by Circular dated 28.6.1961. DPC selected three Chief Engineers including the appellant, from amongst the first five from the seniority list of eight Superintending Engi- neers. Respondent was at number six in the seniority list and he was not selected. Respondent filed writ petition challenging the above-mentioned se- lection. High Court set aside the selection holding that since the DPC was governed by the guidelines issued by the Central Government which were adopted by the State on 1.10.1999, and as per those guidelines DPC would have had to consider eight Superintending Engineers for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer, and if that had been done, the writ petitioner (respondent herein) would have come within the zone of consideration for promotion. High Court directed fresh DPC to be conducted in accordance with the State Government Circular dated 1.10.1999. A B c D E F As per the direction of the High Court, petitioner was reverted back G to his previous post and fresh date for the meeting of DPC was fixed. In appeal to this Court, respondent contended that though in respect of DPC which met on 16.4.1999, by which date the Circular dated 1.10.1999 had not come into being, the said Circular was not applicable, but Punjab Guidelines dated 17.6.60 were applicable, according to which for each post H 323 324 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. A at least three officers had to be considered. Appellant contended that Punjab Guidelines dated 17 .6.60 were also not applicable as the same were replaced by Punjab Government Circular dated 28.6.61 applied to DPC under which it was sufficient to consider the case of five officials. B Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1. Since all the parties had conceded that for the DPC dated 16.4.99, the Punjab circular dated 1.10.99, which adopted the Central Government's guidelines for the DPC did not apply, the DPC would not have obviously applied guidelines, which were formulated much later. Therefore, the view of the High Court that as per the Central guidelines. C dated 1.10.99 adopted by the Punjab Government, eight candidates had to be considered, could not be accepted. The entire reasoning of the High Court based on the 1.10.99 guidelines would fall to the ground.[327-C-D] D E 2. Guidelines dated 17 .6.60 are no longer applicable once the 28.6.61 guidelines, hne come into being. Therefore, it is these guidelines dated 28.6.61 that are applicable and have been rightly applied by the DPC. [327-F] 3. There was no need for considering the name of the writ petitioner, who was the sixth candidate. Therefore, the writ petitioner's case was rightly not considered for promotion. The High Court erred in applying the wrong guidelines and in thinking that eight names ought to have been considered (including the name of the writ petitioner) and in directing fresh DPC on that ground. [328-E] CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4467 of 2000. F From the Judgment and Order dated 7 .6.2000 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 13240 of 1999. P.P. Rao, P.N. Puri, Rajiv Dutta, A.K. Chopra and M.K. Dua for the appearing parties. G In-person for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. JAGANNADHA RAO, J. Leave granted. The appellant Mr. Sarabjit Singh (2nd respondent in the writ petition) is H aggrieved by the judgment of the Division Bench of High Court of Punjab & .. SARABJIT SINGH v. EX.MAJOR B.D. GUPTA [M. JAGANNADHA RAO, J.] 325 Haryana dated 7 .6.2000 in CWP No. 13240/99 allowing the same in favour of the Ist respondent-writ petitioner, Ex. Major B.D. Gupta. The High Court accepted the contention of the lst respondent that the Departmental promotion committee of the State of Punjab was governed by the guidelines issued by the Centra
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.