Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.32 seconds)
Rajiv Ranjan vs Union Public Service Commission on 4 October, 2012 cites

Amar Kant Choudhary vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 3 January, 1984

12. The Hon'ble Supreme Court considered a case almost similar to the present OA in Amar Kant Choudhary's case (supra). The appellant was a Deputy Superintendent of Police in the State of Bihar and he was eligible to be considered for appointment as a member of the Indian Police Service for the year 1973 His case was placed before the Committee constituted under Regulation 4 of the Regulations for the purpose of preparation of the list of suitable officers for promotion to the Indian Police Service Cadre of the State of Bihar in 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976. In the years 1973, 1974 and 1975, he could not be included in the select list as he was junior to those who were included in the select list. In the year 1976 his name was not included in the select list as there was an adverse entry in his confidential roll of 1973-74. The Selection Committee took the decision to supersede the appellant at its meeting held on December 22. 1976. In view of the above entry in the confidential roll of the appellant. It is not disputed that the said adverse entry was communicated to the appellant in the year 1977 after the above meeting was over. It appears that there were also adverse entries in the annual confidential roll of the appellant for the year 1974-75. They were communicated to the appellant in the year 1976. The appellant made representations in respect of both the adverse entries in time. The adverse entry for the year 1973-74 was expunged by the State Government on December 3, 1980 and the adverse entries in the confidential roll for the year 1974-75 were expunged by two orders dated February 21, 1978 and October 7, 1980. There was no meeting of the Selection Committee from 1977 to 1980. It, however, met on March 11/12, 1981. On this occasion the appellant represented to the Committee that the adverse entries in his confidential rolls had been removed by the State Government by various orders and requested them to consider his case for promotion to the Indian Police Service Cadre. On this occasion the Committee did not look into the confidential rolls of the appellant for the years 1979-80 and 1980-81 which contained entries very favourable to the appellant for no fault of the appellant. The Committee however classified him as 'good' but did not include him in the select list while some of his juniors were included. The appellant represented to the Committee and the State Government against the decision taken by the Committee. The Committee again met on October .14, 1981. When nothing came out of the representations made by him, the appellant filed a writ petition questioning the validity of the decisions of the Selection Committee before: the Hon'ble High Court of Bihar which was dismissed at the stage of admission. Against the order of the High Court the appellant file this SLP before Hon'ble Apex Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 48 - E S Venkataramiah - Full Document

Union Public Service Commission Etc vs Hiranyalal Dev & Ors on 22 March, 1988

He would further place his reliance on the judgment of Honble Supreme Court in the matter of Union Public Service Commission versus Shri Hiranyalal Dev & Ors reported in JT 1988 (1) SC 609 which was also a similar type of case in which review of the case of the respondents was directed to be done by the Selection Committee, as if, there was no adverse remarks against him. He, therefore, urges that intervention of this Tribunal to direct the respondents to convene a review Selection Committee in order to reconsider the applicants case for his promotion to the UT segment of JAGMUT Cadre of IPS.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 54 - N D Ojha - Full Document

Dev Dutt vs Union Of India & Ors on 12 May, 2008

9. A similar analogy can be drawn from the DOP&T OM No.22013/1/97-Estt. (D) dated 13.04.1998 which indicates that a review DPC needs to be convened to rectify certain unintentional mistakes. Once, one of such mistakes which has been outlines in the said OM is fulfilled a review DPC is to be convened. One of the mistakes stipulates that where adverse remarks in the CRs were toned down or expunged after the DPC had considered the case of the officer. As per the law laid by Honble Apex Court in Dev Dutt versus Union of India (AIR 2008 SC 2513) any remark on the basis of which an employee is not promoted/selected to a higher post, would have the effect of adverse remarks. Once such effect is removed either by upgradation or expunction, case of such employee has to be reconsidered in a review Selection Committee or DPC as the case may be. If we apply this logic it would be necessary to conduct a review Selection Committee for the applicant in view of the fact that some of the ACRs where he was graded as Good have been upgraded as Very Good. When he having received Good but could not be selected because Very Good graded officials were available, such non selection become prejudicial against the applicant. Such upgradation of ACRs having been done after the meeting of the Selection Committee, the procedural propriety demands that we should direct the competent authorities to conduct a review Selection Committee for the applicant where the upgraded ACRs need to be considered along with other ACRs to take overall assessment to find out whether he is fit to be promoted to IPS.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 1116 - M Katju - Full Document

Gurdial Singh Fijji vs State Of Punjab & Others on 9 March, 1979

8. After giving our anxious consideration to the uncontroverted material placed before us we have reached the conclusion that the case of the appellant for promotion to the Indian Police Service Cadre has not been considered by the Committee in a just and fair way and his case has been disposed of contrary to the principles laid down in Gurdial Singh Fijji's case (supra).. We accordingly set aside the order of the High Court. We hold that the appellant has made out a case for reconsideration of the question of his promotion to the Indian Police Service Cadre of the State of Bihar as on December 22, 1976 and if he is not selected as on that date for being considered again as on March 12, 1981. If he is not selected as on March 12, 1981 his case has to be considered as on October 14, 1981. The Selection Committee has now to reconsider the case of the appellant accordingly after taking into consideration the orders passed by the State Government subsequently on any adverse entry that may have been made earlier and any other order of similar nature pertaining to the service of the appellant. If on such reconsideration the appellant is selected he shall be entitled to the seniority and all other consequential benefits flowing therefrom. We issue a direction to the respondents to reconsider the case of the appellant as stated above. We hope that the above direction will be complied with expeditiously but not later than four months from today.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 302 - Y V Chandrachud - Full Document
1