Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(c) An order directing the respondents to consider the representations of the applicant by a speaking and reasoned order and further directing them not to make any further promotion till the disposal of the representations.
(d) An order directing the respondents to produce/cause production of all documents/records relating to the subject matter of the case.
(e) Any other order or further order/orders as this Hon'ble Tribunals may deem fit and proper.

3. The facts of the case in brief are that the applicant was selected by the UPSC in 1986 and was appointed as Medical Officer in Central Health Service and was promoted to the post of CMO in the grade of Rs. 12,000-16,500 w.e.f. 28.8.99. After the acceptance of the 5th CPC, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare issued a circular dated 5.4.02 whereby a Dynamic Assured Career Progression Scheme was introduced by which it was decided that General Duty Medical Officer (GDMO) sub-cadre, Medical Officer in the scale of Rs. 8000-12,500 would be promoted to the post of Sr. Medical Officer in the scale of Rs. 10,000-15,200 on completion of 4 years of regular service; Sr. Medical Officer with 5 years of regular service would be promoted to the post of CMO in the scale of Rs. 12,000-16,500 and after 4 years of completion of service will be promoted to the CMO (non-functional selection grade) in the scale of Rs. 14,300-18,300. By subsequent decision of the Govt., it was decided that on completion of 13 years of regular service of GDMO sub-cadre of CHS, the officer of GDMO would be promoted to CMO (NFSG) in the scale of Rs. 14,300-18,300 without linkage to the vacancies (Annexure-A/1). The applicant has completed more than 13 years of service and was thus eligible for promotion to CMO (NFSG) w.e.f. 5.4.02 when DPC was held. However, he was not promoted w.e.f. 5.4.02 though 666 CMOs were promoted to CMO (NFSG) w.e.f. 5.4.02, many of whom were junior to the applicant. The applicant made a representation to the respondent authorities but his case was not considered. The applicant states that he was on study leave for doing MD from All India Institute of Hygiene and Public Health, Kolkata from 1 st May, 2000 to 30th April, 2003 with the permission of the authorities concerned and passed MD examination with distinction securing 2nd position and thereafter he joined back his department during May, 2003. Despite his representation, no action has been taken for his promotion to CMO (NFSG) w.e.f. 5.4.02. The applicant is further aggrieved that the respondents subsequently promoted 125 more CMOs to the post of CMO (NFSG) with retrospective effect w.e.f. 5.4.02 during the year 2005. Even then the applicant was not promoted as CMO (NFSG) though he was senior to most of the doctors who were promoted. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents the applicant has filed this O.A.

4. The respondents have disputed the claim of the applicant and have submitted a detailed reply denying the contention of the applicant. In the written reply they have stated that the DOPT vide instruction contained in O.M. No. 28O38/l/88-Estt. (T) dated 9.10.89 and 1.2.90 issued certain guidelines for promotion to the post of CMO (NFSG). The said instructions provides that the departmental promotional committee will consider the last 5 years' ACRs to satisfy itself and if the overall performance of the officer concerned is 'good' and he/she has got two 'very good' grading in the last 5 years then his/her name may be recommended for placement in the NFSG (Annexure R/2). The applicant in the present O.A. joined CHS on 16.10.87 and thus became eligible for the post of CMO (NFSG) w.e.f. 5.4.02. Even after being considered along with other eligible officers in the meeting of the DPC held in November 2002 and again on 31.3.05 he was not included in the list of promoted officers to the post of CMO (NFSG) as he did not fulfill the prescribed bench-mark for promotion to the said post.

5. The learned Counsel for the applicant, Mr. M.S. Banerjee and Mr. S.K. Dutta have argued that the applicant has never been communicated about any adverse remark during his entire service. Even while he was on study leave he secured the 2nd position in the MD examination and as such his performance, if not "outstanding" should at least be considered as "very good". Even upto now no adverse communication in his ACR has been received. The Id. Counsel has also argued that if there had been any adverse entry or if there had been "any downgrading in his ACRs, it ought to have been communicated to the applicant and since the same has not been done, the respondents have erred in not promoting the applicant. The Id. Counsel has cited the case of U.P. Jal Nigam and Ors. v. Pmbhat Chandra Jain and Ors. , in support of his contention. The learned Counsel has also referred to the decision of Gauhati Bench of the C.A.T. in O.A. 300/02 decided on 27.7.04 in the case of Dr. Ajay Roy v. Union of India and Ors. The learned Counsel has also argued that in the case of Dr. A Arunava Naskarwho had been graded 'average' the remark was communicated to him by the Additional Director and after receiving his representation the Director CGHS reviewed the grading of the said Dr. Arunava Naskar and he was promoted as CMO (NFSG). In this case no average or adverse entry has been communicated to the applicant nor any downgrading in the entry has been communicated to him and as such it is presumed that the applicant was fit to be promoted to the post of CMO (NFSG). The Id. Counsel has also submitted written argument in support of his contention.

8. The learned Counsel for all the applicants have argued that the applicants be promoted as CMO (NFSG) w.e.f. 5.4.02 except Dr. Nilanjan Chattopadhyay who is to be promoted w.e.f. 5.9.2003.

9. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings and the case laws cited.

As per order No. 21/14/97-PC(M)/CHS-V, Govt. of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare dated 5th April, 2002, on completion of 13 years of regular service in GDMO sub-cadre of CHS, officer of GDMO sub-cadre will be promoted to CMO (NFSG) Rs. 14,300-18,000. As per order No. A26021/2003-CHS-V, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, since the post of CMO (NFSG) does not involve duties and responsibilities of greater importance than those attached with the post of CMO, the benefit of FR 22(l)(a)(l) cannot be allowed for fixation of pay on their promotion from CMO to CMO (NFSG). As per the conditions for grant of the benefit under the ACP Scheme, the financial benefit under the scheme shall be granted from the date of completion of the eligibility period under the ACP Scheme or from the date of issue of these instructions whichever is later.