S.K. Mehra vs Union Of India & Others

L. Narasimha Reddy, J

This application is filed with a prayer to review the order dated 13.02.2020 passed in OA No. 539/2019. The principal contention urged by the

applicant is that, though his case is similar to the one in Samuel Thomas vs. Secretary to the Government of India in OA No. 999/2014 on the file

of the Ernakulam Bench of the Tribunal, it was not referred to at all.

We heard the applicant, who appears in person and Sh. Gyanendra Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.

At the outset, we make it clear that the case was heard in the open court and the order was also dictated right in the presence of the applicant. He

did not even make a mention of the judgment in OA No. 999/2014. We expressed our inability to grant the relief to the applicant by referring to

various facts including the one that no junior to him was promoted to the post of JCIT with effect from the date, anterior to the date of retirement of

the applicant.

Today, we have perused the judgment of the Ernakulam Bench in Samuel Thomas case (supra). The question as to whether any officer who was

junior to the applicant therein, who too was a retired person, was not examined in that OA. In K.K. Wadhera Vs. Union of India the Hon’ble

Supreme Court categorically held that the question of a retired person being promoted does not arise. An exception is carved out in certain other

cases, such as where a person junior to the one who retired from service is promoted with effect from the date, anterior to such retirement. The

benefit of notional promotion can be extended. Such is not the case he re.

Even today, we specifically asked the applicant as to whether any officer junior to him was promoted prior to the date of his retirement. The

answer is in the negative.

We do not find any ground for review the order in the OA. The RA is accordingly dismissed.

There shall be no order as to costs.