Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. This Tribunal passed an order of status quo as on 28.06.2022 in respect of relieving of the applicant and the said order is in force.
7. The respondents 1 to 3 filed a reply statement, stating that the applicant has been granted promotion as Director & Scientist E in Level-13 of the Pay matrix under the Modified Flexible Complementing Scheme and his seniority has not been overlooked. Against the two Director-in-Charge positions, since Dr. I. Haque, an expert in DNA and manning the State-of- the-art DNA lab in CFSL, Chandigarh was getting superannuated on 30.06.2022 i.e. less than a year, it was decided to retain him in Chandigarh OA No.21/407/2022 and after his retirement, Smt. Sukhminder Kaur would be posted at Chandigarh w.e.f. 01.07.2022 and the applicant, being the next senior most and experienced officer, would be posted in Pune as Director-in-charge w.e.f. 01.07.2022. Shri Sujay Saha was posted in the vacant position at Hyderabad as he was the next senior most. Smt. Kananbala Jena and Dr. Rajivi Giroti, being juniors, were given the benefits of in-situ promotion without making them as In-charge of any CFSL and they would be considered as and when vacancies arise in Director-in-charge position. Being an officer with all India transfer liability, the applicant can be posted anywhere in administrative exigency or public interest. Therefore, upon grant of in-situ promotion, with the approval of competent authority, has been posted as Director & Scientist E.

9. The applicant filed rejoinder and stated that there is no concept of seniority for granting in-situ promotion. Initially, the 4th respondent did not find place in the select list of 2000 since he did complete 4 years residency period, but, he was considered for the in-charge arrangement from 31.07.2019 to February 2021. When it comes to displacement, a different justification is given to retain the 4th respondent at Hyderabad. In regard to the averment of the respondents that Dr. I. Haque was posted as Director at Chandigarh being the DNA expert and his ensuring retirement on 30.06.2022, the applicant stated that, if this were to be true, then, after the retirement of Dr. I. Haque, the 4th respondent, who is the sole DNA expert in the grade of Director should have been posted at Chandigarh, instead of posting Smt. Sukminder Kaur, who is an expert in Chemical Science. In April 2021, when the post of Director in CFSL, Chandigarh was vacant, Sri M.C. Joshi, on his in-situ promotion, as Director was transferred to CFSL, Hyderabad though he was due to retirement on 31.12.2021. This shows that different yardsticks for different officials are being applied. Earlier, in OA No.21/407/2022 the OA 480/2020 filed by the 4th respondent, the official respondents took stance that the concept of junior-senior is not applicable in Flexible Complementing Scheme/ Modified Flexible Complementing Scheme, since in-situ promotions are personal to the officer and are not related to the availability of vacancy, whereas, in the counter filed in the present case, they say that applicant, being senior to the 4th respondent and Smt. K.B. Jena, has been transferred to CFSL, Pune to assume responsibilities of higher post. Para 1.1 of the Transfer Policy circulated on 07.09.2016 mandates that Rotational transfer of all Group „A‟ Officers shall be decided by the competent authority prescribed by the Ministry of Home Affairs, on the recommendations of Placement Committee-I headed by the Director- cum-Chief Forensic Scientist and comprising of at least 2 more members. But, no such Placement Committee-I was convened and without such recommendations, his transfer has been ordered. Thus, the impugned order is a nullity being violative of the transfer policy.