Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

11. According   to   the   petitioner,   on   this   count  correspondence ensued between GPSC and concerned  department.   The   petitioner   has   claimed   that  concerned   department   forwarded   the   ACR   demanded  by   GPSC,   however   even   thereafter   GPSC   found  certain   fault/   anomalies   or   shortfall   and  therefore   GPSC   called   for   clarification   and  copies of ACR. 

11.1   At   one   stage,   GPSC,   according   to   the  petitioner   called   for   entire   file   of   ACR   of  certain employees, which included name of present  petitioner.

12. The   petitioner   has   alleged   that   the   said  exchange   of   correspondence   between   GPSC   and   the  concerned department continued for almost 3 year. 

13. It   is   not   necessary   to   mention   the   details  about   ACR   which   were   allegedly   not   received   by  GPSC and/ or the ACR in respect of which the GPSC  had raised queries with the concerned department.  Suffice   it   to   say   that   on   the   ground   that  relevant ACR were not received and/ or there were  anomalies   in   the   record   forwarded   by   the  department,   GPSC   raised   certain   queries   and,  according   to   the   petitioner,   Resolution   of   the  said   difference   and   confusion   between   GPSC   and  concerned department continued for almost 3 years  i.e. until July, 2000.

15. The   petitioner   has   alleged   that   GPSC  forwarded   names   of   22   employees   vide   its  communication   dated   19.8.1997   to   the   Secretary,  Education Department, however, for almost 3 years  his name could not be cleared and forwarded, only  on account of non­submission of ACR for relevant  period.

16. The   grievance   of   the   petitioner   is   that  except alleged non­submission of ACR for certain  period, there was no ground for non­consideration  of   his   case/   candidature   and   it   was   only   on  account of the alleged non­submission of ACR for  certain period that his case could not be cleared  along with other 22 persons in August, 1977. The  petitioner   has   also   alleged   that   the   respondent  State   acted   upon   GPSC   recommendation   vide  communication   dated   19.8.1997   and   granted  promotion   to   22   employees,   recommended   by   GPSC.  The   petitioner   has   also   alleged   that   ultimately  the issue  got  resolved   somewhere   in 1998­99 and  in   response   to   the   inquiry   by   the   concerned  department,   GPSC   recommended   petitioner's   name  vide   its   communication   dated   29.1.1999.   After  receipt   of   GPSC's   recommendation   vide  communication   dated   29.1.1999   the   concerned  department and competent authority considered the  recommendation   and   passed   order   dated   7.7.2000  promoting   the   petitioner   to   Class­I   cadre.  Accordingly,   the   petitioner   came   to   be   promoted  w.e.f. 7.7.2000.

22.1   Meaning   thereby   the   petitioner's   name   was  last in the provisional select list prepared and  forwarded by DPC to GPSC. 

22.2   Even   the   said   fact   highlights   that   any  person   junior   to   the   petitioner   was   never  promoted   until  the petitioner's  name  came to  be  recommended by GPSC vide its communication dated  29.1.1999   and   it   came   to   be   accepted   by   the  respondent State vide order dated 7.7.2000.

23. Above mentioned details and chronology bring  out   and   make   it   clear   that   the   cause   of   action  for the  petitioner  arose  in October,  1997,  when  the GPSC forwarded names of the said 22 employees  and   GPSC   list   did   not   include   name   of   the  petitioner   however   from   October,   1997   to   July  2000   the   petitioner   did   not   raise   any   claim   or  dispute.   Further,   even   if   this   period   is   not  taken into account then also the cause of action  for   the   petitioner   arose     atleast   in   January,  1999   when   GPSC   forwarded   the   recommendation   qua  the petitioner.