Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: backdated promotion in Dr. Tungvir Singh Arya vs State Of U.P. And Others on 29 January, 2011Matching Fragments
It is submitted by Shri A.R. Masoodi that keeping an eye on the post of Principal for which Dr. Girish Kumar Aneja-respondent No.4 had acquired knowledge from his sources of the possible dates of advertisement, a representation was made by him to give him promotion as Professor of Cardiology by backdating the promotion from 18.6.2006 to 22.5.2005. The State Government willingly obliged in promptly considering his representation and in issuing an Office Memorandum dated 8th February, 2008 promoting him as Professor of Cardiology by personal promotion w.e.f. 22.5.2005. The State Government in para 4, 5 and 6 of the Office Memorandum dated 8th February, 2008 observed that Dr. Aneja, Associate Professor had given option in the Society System and was working w.e.f. 30.3.1999. He was also recommended for promotion as Associate Professor by the Public Service Commission by direct recruitment. The recommendation was stayed by the High Court on account of which it was received in the State Government with considerable delay for which Dr. Aneja was not responsible. The Personnel Department and Law Department of the State Government, had advised that he was entitled to personal promotion w.e.f. 30.3.2003 but that since the Selection Committee met for the first time on 25.5.2005 after the amendment of the Rule on 12.5.2005, his name could not be considered and that he was promoted as Associate Professor on 18.6.2006. The Selection Committee was convened on 8.2.2008, and considering all the circumstances the date of his promotion was amended and that instead of 18.8.2006, he was given promotion w.e.f. 22.6.2005.
Shri Masoodi submits that a special concession was given to Dr. Aneja in backdating his promotion on the ground that his recommendation for direct recruitment was received much later and that the Selection Committee met after the Rules were amended but his name was not considered. Instead of giving the same benefit to all the persons, who were similarly situate, the State Government chose to confer it only to respondent No.4.
Shri Masoodi submits that backdating of promotion of respondent No.4 as Professor of Cardiology from 18.8.2006 to 22.5.2005 also did not make him eligible as he did not get 5 years as Professor on the date of advertisement on 29th August, 2009. The respondent No.4, therefore, made a further representation to the State Government, which was also given priority by the State Government. By Office Memorandum dated 12th December, 2008, the State Government in exercise of his powers of exemption given under Rule 27 of the Rules of 1990 gave notional promotion to Dr. Aneja-respondent No.4 w.e.f. 31.3.2003 and thus making him eligible for direct appointment as Principal.
In this writ petition we are required to consider; (i) whether the petitioner has locus to challenge the orders dated 18.2.2008, backdating the personal promotion of respondent No.4 from 18.8.2006 to 22.5.2005 and thereafter the order passed under Rule 27 of the Rules of 1990 by way of exemption in further backdating the promotion of respondent No.4 as Professor of Cardiology by notional promotion from 22.5.2005 to 31.3.2003; and (2) whether the power to grant relaxation has been exercised in favour of the respondent No.4 fairly and reasonably without causing any discrimination to the petitioner or the other similarly situate person, who could also be eligible for consideration for direct recruitment on the post of Principal in Government Medical Colleges.
We are also incidentally called upon to find out whether the exercise of powers by the State Government in backdating the personal promotion and exemption suffers from malafides.
Before proceeding to consider the arguments, we may observe here the unusual manner and haste in which the State Government has called the meetings of Departmental Promotion Committees for an individual to backdate his promotion on the assumptions of hardship caused to him and the exercise of powers under rule 27 of exemption without recording any reasons in Office Memorandum dated 12th December, 2008 backdating notional promotion from 22.5.2005 to 31.3.2003 and making the respondent No.4 eligible for direct recruitment as Principal.