Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

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.

Shri Masoodi submits that the selections were advertised five months later on 29th August, 2009 with the last date of application as 22nd September, 2009. He submits that firstly by backdating the petitioner's promotion as Professor from 18.8.2006 to 22.5.2005 by Office Memorandum dated 8th February, 2008, thereafter giving him exemption under Rule 27 of the Rules of 1990, in allowing notional promotion as Professor w.e.f. 31.3.2003 by Office Memorandum dated 12.12.2008 and thereafter issuing no objection/ experience certificate, as desired by him in the same terms, for the forthcoming selections, which were not advertised, the State Government virtually bent backwards and played to the tune of Dr. Girish Kumar Aneja-respondent No.4. He was given backdated promotions and exemptions for personal promotion as exceptional favours without any delay and without any invention of the Court.

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.