AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
JUSTICE RITU TAGORE, MEMBER [JUDL.]
Learned counsel for the applicant has placed on record the photocopy of the page of the Service book of the petitioner, indicating that the age of the applicant was relaxed at the time of giving him appointment.
The case of the applicant as projected in the O.A. is that the applicant joined Government service as Forester on 22.06.1978, subsequently, was promoted as Range Officer Grade-I on 18.02.1986, thereafter, was confirmed on 01.05.1992, and became eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests (herein after referred to as “ACF”) on 18.02.1996.
It is stated in O.A. that a clear vacancy of ACF arose on 09.01.2003, yet the applicant's regular promotion was kept in abeyance solely on the basis of certain allegations which were later found to be unsubstantiated. To this effect, it is also pertinent to mention that the DPC/PSC proceedings dated 30.07.2010, approved on 14.12.2010, specifically recorded that one ACF post was to be reserved for the applicant w.e.f. 09.01.2003 subject to clearance of the pending issue.
It is also stated that, applicant’s vigilance clearance was issued on 22.11.2009 and he was fully exonerated from departmental allegations vide order dated 07.12.2016 and despite removal of all impediments, the applicant was not granted regular promotion as ACF, as well as also not given consequential seniority, and was superseded by several juniors who were promoted ahead of him in violation of his recorded seniority.
However, the applicant was placed as In-Charge ACF from 13.12.2006 and continuously discharged higher duties, including as In-Charge Divisional Forest Officer, till his retirement on 30.04.2021, effectively working on higher posts for about 14 years, 7 months and 17 days without corresponding regular promotion or benefits.
It is further stated in the O.A. that on 11.08.2026, the Forest Department issued a list calling for documents from officers for consideration of their cases for promotion to the Indian Forest Service, which conspicuously omits the applicant's name despite his eligibility, top seniority, long meritorious service, vigilance clearance and exoneration.
In the present O.A., the applicant seeks inclusion of his name in the aforementioned list, and a direction to forward his case for IFS promotion consideration, grant of notional/retrospective promotion as ACF with consequential seniority, and all other consequential benefits flowing therefrom. Hence this OA.
Through the medium of the instant petition the applicant seeks for the following reliefs-
a)Direct the respondent department to include/induct the name of applicant in Communication/list dated 11/08/2026 by forwarding his case to the competent Selection Committee/authority for consideration for promotion to the Indian Forest Service in accordance with the Indian Forest Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1966 and other applicable rules;
b)Direct the Respondents to consider the applicant's case for grant of notional/retrospective regular promotion as Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF) with effect from 09/01/2003 (date of clear vacancy as per DPC/PSC record) or from such other date as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit;
c)Direct the Respondents to re-determine and fix the applicant's seniority in the cadre of ACF and in all consequential higher cadres (DCF, CF and IFS) in accordance with law, taking into account his date of entry into service, eligibility for ACF, protected vacancy from 09/01/2003, continuous discharge of higher duties, vigilance clearance dated 22/11/2009, exoneration dated 07/12/2016, top seniority in relevant lists, and excellent/very good APARs;
d)Direct the Respondents to consider the applicant's eligibility for further promotion to the posts of Deputy Conservator of Forests and Conservator of Forests, as applicable, and for induction into the Indian Forest Service under the IFS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1966, and if found eligible, to grant appropriate retrospective/notional relief with consequential seniority;
e)Direct the Respondents to grant all consequential benefits flowing from the above reliefs, including revision of pay fixation, seniority, pension/family pension and other retiral benefits, with arrears as admissible under the rules;
f)Any other order or direction which the Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the given facts and circumstances of this case may also be issued in favour of the applicant and against the respondents, the same would be in consonance with law and justice.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued the matter at length and submitted that the applicant would be satisfied if the present O.A. is treated as a representation and the respondents are directed to consider and decide the same within a stipulated time frame, in light of the averments made therein, along with the documents annexed and the law applicable in the instant case.
Learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. Rasi ud din Ganaie, DAG, submits that, without prejudice to their rights and contentions, the respondents have no objection if the present O.A. is treated as a representation and is disposed of in terms of the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present O.A. may be disposed of at this stage by treating the same as a representation.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present O.A. is disposed of with a direction to respondents to treat this O.A. as representation and to accord due consideration to the assertions and the applicant’s claim made therein, in light of the law holding the field and subject to the entitlement and eligibility of the applicant and to the post in question, as well as other applicable conditions and rules and regulations. Further, if there is no impediment. Respondents shall also take into consideration the documents annexed with the O.A. while according such consideration. Further, the applicant be also associated while disposing of the representation.
The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by passing a comprehensive reasoned, speaking, and detailed order.
It is clarified that this Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claims or contentions raised by either side. All questions of fact and law are left open to be considered by the competent authority, in accordance with law.
Accordingly, O.A. No. 987/2026 is disposed of along with the connected M.As., if any, parties are to bear their own costs.
Consign the file to the Record Room, after due compliance.