Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sd Abdul Kalam Khan vs The Kolkata Port Trust & Ors on 28 June, 2019
Author: Amrita Sinha
Bench: Amrita Sinha
1
28.06.2019 W.P. No. 5769 (W) of 2019
sd Abdul Kalam Khan vs. The Kolkata Port Trust & Ors.
Ct 24.
Mr. Rudranil De
Mr. Z. Haque ..For the petitioner.
Mr. Kollol Basu
Mrs. Rumpa Ghosh ..For the respdt. nos. 1-6.
The report in the form of affidavit filed by the
respondent no. 6 and the exception filed by the
petitioner are taken on record.
The petitioner is serving as a Fire Engine Driver cum Pump Operator of the Kolkata Port Trust. The petitioner submits that he is entitled to be promoted in the post of Senior Leading Fireman. The case of the petitioner has not been considered by the authority as a criminal proceeding was pending against him.
A criminal complaint was filed against the petitioner in the year 2016 and the same is pending till date.
The petitioner relies upon an office memo dated 14th September 1992 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training which 2 mentions that where the criminal proceeding against a Government servant is not concluded even after the expiry of two years from the date of the meeting of the first Departmental Promotion Committee which kept its findings in respect of the Government servant in a sealed cover, in such a situation the appointing authority may review the case of the Government servant, provided he is not under suspension, to consider the desirability of giving him ad hoc promotion. Certain conditions are required to be fulfilled prior to review of the promotion of the Government servant. The petitioner makes a prayer for consideration of his case in terms of the aforesaid provision in the memo dated 14th September 1992.
Admittedly, the petitioner is not under suspension. The criminal proceeding which was initiated in the year 2016 is yet to be completed.
After hearing submissions made on behalf of both parties, it appears that the case of the petitioner for promotion may be considered in accordance with the Government guidelines.
In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent no. 3 to take 3 necessary steps for review of the prayer for promotion of the petitioner in accordance with paragraph 5 of the office memorandum dated 14th September 1992 within a period of three months from the date of communication of a copy of this order and pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner within a fortnight thereafter.
It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case and all points are left open to be taken by the Departmental Promotion Committee at the time of consideration of the prayer of the petitioner.
As the instant writ petition is disposed of without calling for any affidavits, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.
W.P. No. 5769 (W) of 2019 is disposed of. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order be given to the parties, if applied for.
( Amrita Sinha, J. ) ``