AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.V.Anjaria, J
Heard learned advocate Mr.N.K. Majmudar for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Ishaan Joshi for the respondent.
The present petition was filed to get set aside the communication dated 05th August, 2014 as contrary to the statutory rules of revision of pay and violative of Government Resolution dated 03rd October, 2012. In the next, the petitioner prayed to direct the respondent authorities to decide his representations dated 22nd October, 2015 and 23rd November, 2016 expeditiously. The third prayer was to direct the respondent authority concerned to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Director, Animal Husbandry, Class-II without considering the adverse entries in the aforesaid communication dated 05th August, 2014.
During the pendency of the petition, amongst other orders, following order came to be passed by the Court on 05th August, 2020.
"Having heard Mr.Majmudar, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Bhargav Pandya, learned AGP for the respondent - State and considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the development, during the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner is directed to make a representation to the respondent No.1 - State - Secretary Agricultural and Cooperation Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar, with a copy to the other respondents, at the earliest and the same shall be considered by the respondent No.1 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, sympathetically."
3.1 In Civil Application (For Direction) No.5656 of 2017 filed in the parent proceedings, the prayer was to direct the authorities to undertake the assessment of the petitioner for promoting him to the post of Assistant Director, Animal Husbandry, in which Civil Application the Court recorded on 03rd May, 2017 thus.
"If at all petitioner succeeds then he would be entitled to promotion from deemed date irrespective of any technicalities including non-consideration of petitioner's case by DPC."
It was given out that pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 05th August, 2020, the representation of the petitioner came to be considered by the competent authority and was decided as per order dated 24th September, 2020 passed by the competent authority. By the said order, the adverse remarks against the petitioner came to be expunged. By filing additional affidavit dated 22nd October, 2020, the petitioner has placed on record the aforesaid facts and the order dated 24th September, 2020.
4.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner as further pointed out on the basis of the contents of the affidavit that junior employee to the petitioner came to be promoted to the post in the month of March, 2018. He, therefore, submitted that petitioner should be considered for promotion by way of deemed date. Learned Assistant Government Pleader could not dispute the said proposition. Since the junior to the petitioners is stated to have been given promotion from March, 2018, it goes without saying that the case of the petitioner for the deemed date of promotion will have to be considered in that light.
As the adverse entries/remarks against the petitioner has been expunged and stands erased from record, the entire basis for not considering the case of the petitioner has vanished. The petitioner is entitled to be considered for the post of Assistant Director, Animal Husbandry, Class-II in view of expunging of the adverse entries against him and having regard to the observations made by this Court in order dated 03rd May, 2017 in the Civil Application as aforementioned as well as in light of the aforesaid facts including promotion of the juniors to the petitioner.
In the aforesaid view, it will be proper if the petitioner is required to make a representation to the competent authority of the respondents for getting deemed date of promotion and consequential benefits on the basis that his junior was promoted in the month of March, 2018.
6.1 It is directed that the competent authority of the respondents shall consider such representation of the petitioner in light of the above facts and the orders of the Court and shall take necessary decision within six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation of the petitioner about the conferment of deemed date and the resultant benefits.
The petition stands partially allowed and disposed of in terms of the aforesaid directions. Rule is made absolute to the said extent.
ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATIONS
In view of order of even date passed in the main Special Civil Application, present Civil Applications do not survive for any orders and stand disposed of accordingly. Rule is discharged.