Delhi High Court - Orders
Ajay Pant & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 June, 2020
Author: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
Bench: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Asha Menon
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3584/2020
AJAY PANT & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ankur Chhiber, Adv.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanatan Shankar, Ms.
Aakanksha Kaul and Mr. Manek
Singh, Advs. for UOI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON
ORDER
% 18.06.2020 [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]
CM No.12745/2020 (for exemption) & CM No.12746/2020 (for exemption from filing duly affirmed affidavit(s) and requisite court fees).
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions and as per the extant rules.
2. The applications are disposed of.
W.P.(C) 3584/2020.
3. The thirty eight petitioners impugn the order dated 10 th July, 2019 as well as the seniority list dated 24th April, 2020 published with respect to the post of Assistant Commandants in Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force, of/by the respondents, to the extent that it does not treat the petitioners to have been promoted with effect from the year in which they have been promoted i.e. with effect from 2013, and whereby the petitioners have been shown en masse junior to all the direct recruits and Limited Departmental Competitive W.P.(C) 3584/2020 Page 1 of 4 Examinations (LDCEs) candidates who have been appointed w.e.f. 2013 to 2017; consequently, mandamus directing the respondents to redraft the seniority list by treating the petitioners to have been promoted to the rank of Assistant Commandant with effect from the year against which they have been promoted, is sought.
4. The Memorandum dated 24th April, 2020 appending the seniority list thereto, itself invites representations if any against the seniority list. The petitioners claim to have made such representations and further claim that the same have not been decided till now.
5. We have thus enquired, whether the representations invited are statutory in character and required to be decided before a challenge to the seniority list can be made.
6. The answer is in the affirmative.
7. The seniority list so published is yet further subject to the outcome of W.P.(C) No.3552/2019, W.P.(C) No.13176/2019 and W.P.(C) No.1806/2020 of this Court. We have enquired, whether the issues as urged in the present petition are linked to the issues in the referred writ petitions.
8. The counsel for the petitioners states that the referred writ petitions are with respect to the inter se seniority of LDCEs and direct recruits and have no bearing on the petitioners all of whom belong to the promotee cadre. It is thus contended that the outcome of the referred writ petitions would be immaterial qua the decision on the petitioners' representations or these writ petitions.
9. The counsel for the respondents appearing on advance notice informs W.P.(C) 3584/2020 Page 2 of 4 that one of the referred writ petitions, i.e. W.P.(C) No.3552/2019 is listed next on 2nd September, 2020.
10. The contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that though in the impugned seniority list the petitioners have been placed correctly in seniority but their date of promotion to the post of Assistant Commandant though against the years 2013 onwards, is shown as with effect from the year 2017 and owing whereto the petitioners would be prejudiced in the matter of promotion to the post of Deputy Commandant and pay fixation. It is contended that an order notionally promoting the petitioners to the post of Assistant Commandant with effect from the year against which they have been promoted, is required to be passed and once that is done, the petitioners would only claim pay fixation and promotion on that basis only for future and not claim any arrears on that account.
11. The counsel for the respondents, on enquiry states that a time of about four weeks is required for deciding the representation.
12. Since the petitioners, if their representation is decided against them, would be compelled to file a writ petition all over again, to obviate the same, we choose to keep this petition pending, awaiting the decision on the representation of the petitioners.
13. The representations made by the petitioners pursuant to the seniority list dated 24th April, 2020 be decided within four weeks of today.
14. Issue notice.
15. Notice is accepted by the counsel for the respondents.
16. If the representation of the petitioners is not acceded to, a counter W.P.(C) 3584/2020 Page 3 of 4 affidavit to this writ petition be filed within six weeks of today.
17. Rejoinder within further four weeks thereafter.
18. List on 2nd September, 2020 along with W.P.(C) No.3552/2019 titled Tarun Kumar Banjaree Vs. Union of India.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J ASHA MENON, J JUNE 18, 2020 'pp' W.P.(C) 3584/2020 Page 4 of 4