P.N. Premachandran vs State Of Kerala And Ors on 6 November, 2003
8. The denial of ante-dating was clearly arbitrary, considering that there
were 7 vacancies in the year 2009 and the petitioners were placed at serial
numbers 1 and 2. The mere formality that the MHA or the GNCTD found it
convenient to constitute the DPC much later, ought not to have prejudiced
the petitioners or - for that matter, other eligible officers whose cases ought
to have been considered time to time, on periodical basis. The respondents
are in fact urging that their inability to carry out this period exercise should
be held against the petitioner - an argument flawed in logic and utterly
unreasonable. If the justification offered by the respondents were to be
accepted, the ante-dating of promotion of the petitioners to 1.7.2011 - when
the DPC met only at the end of 2012 cannot be explained. The CAT, in fact,
relied upon and has cited the decisions of the Supreme Court in P.N.
Premchandran v. State of Kerala, 2004 (1) SCC 245, Union of India & Anr.