Hansa Dutt Joshi vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Manoj kumar tiwari. J

By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following relief:-

“i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.1 & 2 to promote the petitioner on the post of Senior Management Officer from 12.09.2014”

It is not in dispute that petitioner retired from service on 30.09.2015. According to him, on 12.09.2014 three persons serving as Management Officer were promoted as Senior Management Officer, ignoring his claim. Thus, petitioner has sought a direction to promote him from the date the other three persons were promoted on the ground that he was denied promotion on the ground that his Annual Confidential Reports were not in the prescribed performa.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner cannot be penalized for his Annual Confidential Reports not being in the prescribed performa. He further submits that vacancy was also available, yet petitioner was not considered for promotion.

Learned State Counsel, however, submits that it is not the case of the petitioner that any person junior to him was promoted as Senior Management Officer on 12.09.2014. He submits that notional promotion can be claimed when a junior person is promoted by ignoring claim of his senior, then such senior person can claim promotion from the date his junior was wrongly promoted. He, however, submits that if petitioner has any grievance against his non promotion despite availability of vacancies, then he can make a representation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that representation made by petitioner is pending before the respondent no.2 i.e. Rajya Sampatti Adhikari, Uttarakhand.

We accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to respondent no.2 to take a decision on petitioner’s representation dated 09.12.2015 (Annexure no.7 to the writ petition), one way or the other, within four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.