AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Alok Singh, J.—Petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court assailing the order dated 9.3.2005 passed by Deputy Zonal Manager (East), Food Corporation of India, thereby rejecting the representation of the petitioner and further to issue writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to give effect to the promotional order dated 8.11.2004. Perusal of the order dated 8.11.2004 (Annexure-1) would reveal that petitioner''s name finds place at serial no. 17. Employees, mentioned in the order dated 8.11.2004, were directed to be promoted on the grade of Deputy Manager (General) on purely ad hoc basis with the stipulation that before giving effect to the order of promotion, Zonal Manager/SRM/Head of the Division should ensure that no vigilance case is pending against the officers directed to be given ad hoc promotion.
Perusal of the impugned order dated 9.3.2005 would reveal that, as per the condition no. 7 of the promotion order, senior officers tried to find out as to whether vigilance case was pending against the petitioner. On enquiry, it was found that a C.B.I. (criminal case) bearing R.C. Case No. 14(A)/1994-PAT dated 11.5.1994 was pending against the petitioner and sanction to prosecute the petitioner was also granted by the competent authority.
In view of the pendency of the criminal case (C.B.I.), order dated 8.11.2004 was not implemented and petitioner was denied ad hoc promotion.
Ms. Ritu Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, while referring to Annexure-5 (page 24 of the paper book), has vehemently argued that as per the circular of the F.C.I., if Disciplinary/Court proceedings are not concluded even after the expiry of two years from the date of the D.P.C., promotion as recommended by the D.P.C. may be given effect to.
Since the petitioner''s name was never recommended in the D.P.C., and petitioner alongwith other employees were given promotion only on ad hoc basis, therefore, circular has no application in the present case. Consequently, the writ petition is misconceived and same stands dismissed.