Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 300 (RAJ)

Ram Narayan Sharma v. U. O. I.

2001-02-20

ARUN MADAN, K.S.RATHORE

body2001
JUDGMENT 1. 1. Briefly stating the facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Clerk vide order dated 21.2.91 in the office of the Divisional Railway Manager, Western Railway, Kota. Thereafter, in the year 1997, vide order dated 10.12.97, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Senior Clerk on ad hoc basis against a clear vacant post. After 8 days i.e. on 18.12.97, the post of Senior Clerk against which the petitioner was promoted was surrendered and later on it was restored vide order dated 29.5.98. The petitioner was promoted on the post of Senior Clerk on ad hoc basis on a clear vacant post vide order dated 10.12.97 but for want of post he was reverted on the post of LDC vide order dated 4.2.98 but the petitioner did not opt to challenge the reversion order dated 4.2.98 before the Central Administrative Tribunal at the relevant point of time. Thereafter, prescribed examinations were conducted for the promotion to the post of Senior Clerk. The petitioner appeared and qualified the examination and was promoted to the post of Sr. Clerk on regular basis on 20.4.99. The petitioner filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench Jaipur for quashing the reversion order dated 4.2.98 praying that the respondents may be directed to treat the petitioner as promoted with effect from 10.12.97 with all consequential benefits. 2. We have heard the learned counsel Shri I.S. Malik and perused the order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur and also the Annexures annexed with the writ petition. 3. The petitioner's main contention was that the surrender of the post of Senior Clerk was because of inadvertent mistake and was rectified by a corrigendum dated 29.5.98. Since the petitioner was promoted on the post of Senior Clerk on ad hoc basis against the clear vacant post vide order dated 10.12.97, he is entitled to be regularised from 10.12.97 and is also entitled for all consequential benefits. He further submits that action of the respondents for reverting the petitioner is illegal and have wrongly surrendered the post of Senior Clerk which has adversely affected the legitimate right of the petitioner. It has also been contended that the Central Administrative Tribunal misrepresented the word `surrender' as flouted in its order dated 8.11.2000. 4. He further submits that action of the respondents for reverting the petitioner is illegal and have wrongly surrendered the post of Senior Clerk which has adversely affected the legitimate right of the petitioner. It has also been contended that the Central Administrative Tribunal misrepresented the word `surrender' as flouted in its order dated 8.11.2000. 4. The petitioner submitted his written representation to the respondent No. 2 and also served a notice for demand of justice on 6.9.2000 and since no order has been passed on the representations, the petitioner has left no option other than to file O.A. before the Tribunal. 5. We are not impressed by the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner and after carefully gone through the judgment passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur and the orders passed by the respondents, the petitioner cannot take advantage of the stop-gap arrangement by way of ad hoc promotion against the post and also that he was not having the requisite qualification and has not passed the prescribed examination which is necessary for the promotion on the post of Senior Clerk. The petitioner only appeared in the prescribed examination for promotion in the year 1999 and after passing the same with effect from 20th April, 1999, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Senior Clerk. Since the petitioner accepted the promotion and has not challenged the reversion order dated 4.2.98 at that relevant point of time, the petitioner is not entitled to get all consequential benefits with effect from 10.12.97 and he is only entitled to get consequential benefits with effect from 20.4.99 i.e. after passing the prescribed examination and duly selecting as per the provisions of law. 6. As such no interference is called for in the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. 7. The writ petition is hereby dismissed at the admission stage itself.Writ Petition dismissed. *******