Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

11. Counsel for applicants filed short Rejoinder Affidavit through which it is stated that in previous years the respondents have adopted the policy of promotion on vacancy based roaster due to which the strength of UDCs exceeded in previous years DPCs. It is further stated that the respondents have committed manifest error of law by adopting the vacancy based roaster in the previous year's promotions. If the post based roaster had been adopted in accordance with the DOPTs OM dated 02.07.1997, no anomalies have been created in the later years promotions. It is required from the respondents that on the basis of which circular or office OM the respondents have adopted the vacancy based roaster in promotion and disobeyed the provisions of OM dated 02.07.1997. It is further stated that the respondents were directed to promote the UDCs and Sub- inspectors in the ratio of 7:5:9 in compliance with the order dated 08.01.2009 passed by the CAT Principal Bench, New Delhi in OA No.2120/2007, P.K. Dixit and others vs. Union of India & Ors vide order dated 06.11.2009. It is further required from the respondents to clarify that on which basis the respondents were adopting the promotion on the basis of vacancy based roaster in previous years DPCs since 2010 to 2015 and why they are adopting the policy for promotion on the post based roaster. Had the respondents adopted the post based roaster in promotion of UDC in previous years DPCs, the post of inspectors for promotion through UDCs would have not been filled up. Even if the post of UDCs are not available for promotion in current year of 2016 then also the applicant are entitled to be promoted in view of the Hon'ble Apex Court's order in Vijay Singh Charak vs. Union of India which provides as under:-