Case Note & Summary
The Union of India and other petitioners challenged the judgment and order dated 30-11-2007 passed by the Division Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur, in O.A. No.34 of 2006. The Tribunal had allowed the application filed by the respondent, Avinash S/o S.D. Sharma, directing the petitioners to convene a review Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) to consider his case for promotion. The respondent was working as a Divisional Accountant Officer, Grade-II in the Office of the Executive Engineer, Kukdi Irrigation Division No.II, Shrigonda, District Ahmednagar. The petitioners, represented by Shri S.B. Bangde, argued that the Tribunal's order was erroneous. However, the High Court, after hearing both sides, dismissed the petition, upholding the Tribunal's direction. The court found no merit in the challenge and ruled that the Tribunal's order was consistent with the applicable rules and did not warrant interference.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Promotion - Review DPC - Central Administrative Tribunal - The Tribunal directed the petitioners to convene a review DPC to consider the respondent's case for promotion. The High Court upheld the order, finding no error in the Tribunal's decision. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal was justified in directing the petitioners to convene a review Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) to consider the case of the respondent for promotion.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal directing the petitioners to convene a review DPC to consider the respondent's case for promotion.
Law Points
- Service Law
- Promotion
- Review DPC
- Central Administrative Tribunal
- Judicial Review
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 421
Writ Petition No.1177 of 2009
A. H. Joshi, R. K. Deshpande
Shri S. B. Bangde for the petitioners, Shri Sumant Deopujari for the respondent
Union of India, through the Comptroller and Auditor General of India; The Accountant General (A & E)-II, Maharashtra, Nagpur; The Deputy Accountant General (Administration), O/O Accountant General (A&E)-II, Maharashtra, Nagpur
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal directing the petitioners to convene a review DPC for promotion of the respondent.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought to quash the judgment and order dated 30-11-2007 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur, in O.A. No.34 of 2006.
Filing Reason
The petitioners were aggrieved by the Tribunal's direction to convene a review DPC to consider the respondent's case for promotion.
Previous Decisions
The Central Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur, by its judgment and order dated 30-11-2007, allowed O.A. No.34 of 2006 filed by the respondent, directing the petitioners to convene a review DPC.
Issues
Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal was justified in directing the petitioners to convene a review DPC to consider the case of the respondent for promotion.
Submissions/Arguments
Shri S. B. Bangde, learned Advocate for the petitioners, argued that the Tribunal's order was erroneous and should be set aside.
Shri Sumant Deopujari, learned Counsel for the respondent, supported the Tribunal's order.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found no error in the Tribunal's order directing the petitioners to convene a review DPC for consideration of the respondent's promotion, and thus dismissed the petition.
Judgment Excerpts
This petition challenges the judgment and order dated 30-11-2007 passed by the Division Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, allowing the O. A. No.34 of 2006 filed by the Respondent.
The Tribunal has directed the appellant to convey review DPC to consider the case of the respondent.
Procedural History
The respondent filed O.A. No.34 of 2006 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur, which was allowed on 30-11-2007. The petitioners challenged this order by filing Writ Petition No.1177 of 2009 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, which was dismissed on 15-01-2010.
