Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 1164 (PAT)

Amerika Prasad v. State Of Bihar

2006-12-01

V.N.SINHA

body2006
Judgment 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner, who is holding the post of District Superintendent of Education, Purnea, has approached this Court for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider his case for grant of Junior Selection Grade with effect from 13.6.1995, the date his other juniors were granted such promotion as his case for such promotion was kept pending on the ground that his services were not confirmed on the date of consideration, which is evident from the proceedings of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 31.7.1999 and 13.8.1999, Annexure-1. Later, the services of the petitioner was confirmed with effect from the due date, which fact is evident from the notification of the State Government bearing No. 627 dated 29.10.2001, Annexure-2. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that even after confirmation with effect from the due date under Annexure-2, case of the petitioner for grant of promotion in the Junior Selection Grade is not being considered as he has been served with a charge-sheet in the year 2004 in which the Enquiry Officer having considered the reply submitted by the petitioner has furnished his report exonerating him but till date the proceedings have not been concluded. Alternatively, it is further submitted that the charge-sheet and the proceedings taken in the year 2004 cannot be a ground to deprive the petitioner of his promotion in the Junior Selection Grade with effect from the due date as on that date admittedly no charge-sheet was served on him. In support of this submission, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India etc. etc. vs. K.V. Jankiraman, etc. etc., reported in AIR 1991 Supreme Court 2010. 4. Counsel for the State although has filed counter affidavit and has not disputed the aforesaid fact but has contended that the charge-sheet which was served on the petitioner in the year 2004 relates to allegation of the year 1996 and in the circumstances the case law of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India, etc. etc. vs. K.V. Jankiraman, etc. etc. (supra) has no application to the case of the petitioner. 5. etc. vs. K.V. Jankiraman, etc. etc. (supra) has no application to the case of the petitioner. 5. I regret to accept the aforesaid submission as it is well known that the proceeding is initiated with effect from the date charge-sheet is served and not with effect from the date the allegations are levelled. Levelling of the allegation cannot be a ground to refuse promotion. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct the competent authority to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion in the Junior Selection Grade with effect from the due date and pass reasoned order, if they are not inclined to grant him such promotion but while passing the reasoned order, the authorities should not be influenced by the charge-sheet, as the same has been issued/served in the year 2004 and was not in existence when the promotion became due and was kept pending on account of non-confirmation. Necessary consideration in compliance of this order, should be made as early as possible, in any case within a period of three months from the date of reciept/production of a copy of this order. 6. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. No cost.