Research › Browse › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

1998 DIGILAW 674 (KAR)

DR. S. B. JIGAJINNI v. HUBLI-DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

1998-10-07

V.GOPALA GOWDA

body1998
( 1 ) THE petitioner is a Medical Officer in the first respondent-Corporation. He asserts that the corporation has no Cadre and Recruitment Rules of its own. Vide Annexure-Q the resolution dated 8-3-1994 the Corporation has adopted the Government Order dated 17-10-1992 by which the Government Order dated 19-9-1991 providing for Time Bound Promotion has been made applicable. The grievance of the petitioner is that eventhough respondents 2 to 13 were juniors to him, they have been given Time Bound Promotion. Hence he has filed LA. I seeking to quash those promotional orders at Annexure-T dated 14-6-1994 and Annexure-V, dated 20-6-1994. The further prayer of the petitioner is to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Surgeon/senior Health Officer from the date his juniors were promoted with all consequential benefits. In the circumstances,. A. I is allowed. ( 2 ) ALL the respondents were served. While the first respondent is represented by Counsel, respondents 2 to 13 have remained unrepresented and absent. No statement of objections is filed on behalf of the first respondent. ( 3 ) IT is seen from the Seniority List at Annexure-D that respondents 2 to 13 are juniors to the petitioner. Petitioner also possesses the requisite qualification and prescribed length of service and he is eligible for Time Bound Promotion. His case has not at all been considered for such time Bound Promotion. The petition averments are also not controverted by the respondents. ( 4 ) THE petitioner is seeking for quashing of the impugned orders. If those orders are quashed, the settled position of respondents 2 to 13 long back would be disturbed. That can be avoided and at the same time the interest of the petitioner is also safeguarded by issuing appropriate directions to the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion. Therefore, it is not necessary to quash the promotional orders of respondents 2 to 13. ( 5 ) ACCORDINGLY, the writ petition is allowed partly. That can be avoided and at the same time the interest of the petitioner is also safeguarded by issuing appropriate directions to the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion. Therefore, it is not necessary to quash the promotional orders of respondents 2 to 13. ( 5 ) ACCORDINGLY, the writ petition is allowed partly. A writ of mandamus is issued to the first respondent-Corporation to consider the case of the petitioner for Time Bound Promotion on the basis of his entry into service and if he is found eligible, he shall be granted the benefit from the date respondents 2 to 13 were given the benefit and his seniority in the promoted post be fixed in appropriate place and he shall be granted all consequential benefits. Time for compliance is two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.