Dr. Sahadeva Singh vs Union Of India Through on 19 August, 2008
In this regard, Shri Padma Kumar S., learned counsel for the applicant placed his reliance on the judgment of Honble Delhi High Court in the matter of Dr. Sahadeva Singh versus Union of India and Others [WP(C) No. 5549/2007 decided on 28.02.2012]. He also submits that in any case this Tribunal had already directed the respondent to conduct a review DPC for the applicant, but the same was not held as the applicants representation was considered and rejected. His contention is that one vacancy was available for which the applicant could have been considered and in this regard he took us through the pleadings wherein the copies of various communications of the respondent are available in support of his claim with regard to availability of vacancy for whch the applicant should have been considered. Drawing our attention to the pages 117-118 of the paper book, it is submitted that the applicants name was recommended on 25.04.2005, as per the information available in pages 69-70 of the paper book, but for the fact that he was retiring on 30.04.2005 i.e. four days before his retirement, his name was not considered for promotion to the post of CE. It was further contended that had the DoP&T OM on extended panel issued on 09.04.1996 been followed, the applicant would have been available for promotion as CE from 31.01.2005. In view of the above contention, Sh. Padma Kumar S. urges to allow the Original Application with directions to the respondent to convene a review DPC for the post of CE for the year 2004/2005 and in case the applicant is found fit he should be promoted at least notionally on the said post and his retirement benefits should be revised on the basis of the same.