Ajay Kumar vs State of Jharkhand

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction upon the respondents for consideration of his case for grant of ad-hoc promotion on the

post of Section Officer in the light of Resolution No. 6227 dated 20.11.2008. Further prayer has been made to dispose of the representation dated

27.03.2018 in the light of Resolution dated 20.11.2008. Â

The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner was appointed in Secretariat Assistant Cadre on 15.04.1986. He has cleared 1st

  and 3rd  papers of the Departmental Examination conducted by the Board of Revenue, Government of Bihar vide Memo No.2791(4) dated

27.06.1996 and also cleared 2nd paper vide Memo No.1880(4) dated 18.09.1998. The services of the petitioner were affirmed vide memo No. 181

dated 19.12.1998 and the name of the petitioner appeared at sl. No. 2206 in the Gradation List prepared by Department of Personnel, Administrative

Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Bihar vide Memo No.181 dated 19.12.1998. After bifurcation of the State of Bihar on 15.11.2000 the

services of the petitioner was allocated to the State of Jharkhand.  It is a specific case of the petitioner that due to pendency of the criminal

case, the petitioner was not considered for promotion to the post of Section Officer, Government of Jharkhand, whereas, several juniors to the

petitioner have already been considered and granted promotion on the post of Section Officer who have reached up to the Deputy Secretary. It is

the further case of the petitioner that though he has been acquitted in Vigilance Case No.33 of 1991 by the Court of learned Special Judge, Vigilance,

vide judgment dated 25.10.2016 and also in  Vigilance Case No.33 of 1992 which was set-aside by the Hon’ble Patna High Court in Criminal

Miscellaneous No.39130 of 2014 and two other cases, i.e., Vigilance Case No.41 of 1991 and 22 of 1992 are pending for cognizance. On the

ground of pendency of those criminal cases, the petitioner was not considered for promotion to the post of Section Officer. A guideline has been

issued vide Resolution No.6227 dated 20.11.2008 by the State Government regarding consideration of the case of the employees for promotion during

the pendency of the criminal cases. Clause 5 and 6 of the said Resolution speaks about how the cases in which criminal cases are pending shall be

considered for granting promotion. Though the petitioner represented before the respondents for taking into consideration their own Resolution

dated 20.11.2008 but the same has not been considered and till date the petitioner has been denied promotion to the post of Section Officer on the

ground of pendency of criminal case which is pending since 1991. As no decision has been taken by the respondents, the petitioner has rushed to

this Court by preferring the instant writ petition. Â

Mr. Deepak Kumar Prasad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner very fairly submits that as no decision has been taken by the

respondents on the pending representation, a direction be given to them to consider the case in view of Resolution No.6227 dated 20.11.2008 and if the

case of the petitioner is found fit for consideration in view of clause 5 and 6 of the said resolution, an order to that effect be passed for promotion.Â

Per contra, no counter-affidavit has been filed. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Shahi, the learned AC to the learned AAG Mr. H.K. Mehta submits that as no

counter-affidavit has been filed, he is not in a position to say as to why the case of the petitioner has not been considered in view of Resolution dated

20.11.2008 whereas, the case of the other similarly situated persons have already been considered. However, it has been fairly submitted that if a

direction is issued by this Court, the same shall be considered and a reasoned order shall be passed and if the case of the petitioner is found fit for

consideration in view of the Resolution No.6227 dated 20.11.2008 considering clause 5 and 6, a suitable reasoned order shall be passed.

Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that case of the petitioner needs

consideration. The issue regarding ad-hoc promotion during the pendency of the criminal case fell for consideration before this High Court in case of

“State of Jharkhand vs. Vinod Mani Diwakar and Ors.†reported in 2010 (2) JLJR 89. The Division Bench of this High Court affirmed the

order of Central Administrative Tribunal holding therein that the petitioner was entitled for promotion as the criminal case which was pending for more

than 20 long years has not been decided till date and as such the case of the petitioner cannot be ignored. The Resolution of the State Government

dated 20.11.2008 and clause 5 and 6 also clearly speaks regarding consideration of the case of the employees during pendency of a criminal case. In

view of the judgment rendered by this Court in “State of Jharkhand vs. Vinod Mani Diwakar and Ors.†and also in view of the Resolution

No.6227 dated 20.11.2008, I, hereby, direct respondent no.2 to consider the case of the petitioner and to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law

within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to say that if the case of the petitioner is found squarely

covered by the judgment of this Hon’ble Court rendered in case of “State of Jharkhand vs. Vinod Mani Diwakar and Ors.†and also in view

of the Resolution of the State Government and if it is found that the petitioner is entitled, an order to that effect regarding promotion with all

consequential benefits be issued within a further period of three weeks of the decision.Â

The writ petition stands disposed of.                Â