^:^:^W.WttOW^^^W 1 ¥v ^.^.pia. Mi r F\ u c ^\ly. *•/-»** •< ^•^^'iw^lf-r^ww' ^^^ C^ /^-3^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGRH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^M?/^ ^^•—\~^ ^ x^i |»(S.».K^»M^» ^.R^n^ ^ L^ W.P W N0.<3\^o ^ /20l|tl 1. 3. 4. Arvind Kumar Pandey Aged about 46 Years S/o Dwijendra nath Pandey C-45, Vasant Vihar Colony Seepat Raod, Bilaspur 495006 VERSUS Coal India Limited Through its Chairman 10, Netaji Subhash Chandra Road Kolkata (C.G) Coal India Limited Director (Personal and Industrial Relation) 10, Netaji Subhash Chandra Road Kolkata (C.G) South Eastern Coal field Limited Through its Chairman / Managing Director SECL-Bhavan, Seepat Road Bilaspur (C.G) Director (Personal) South Eastern Coal field Limited SECL-Bhavan, Seepat Road Bilaspur (C.G) FF" •^w!,-,c^w»^o*;vt»»»<-")j?M»Cy ] I rAGE N-o .^.-. ^^^,^x^^--l?-wt»^'^l?^"'R?&''w^' cb Deputy Chief Personal Manager (Executive Establishment) South Eastern Coal field Limited SECL-Bhavan, Seepat Road Bilaspur (C.G) 6. General Manager (H.O.D) (Electrical and Mechanical) South Eastern Coal field Limited SECL-Bhavan, Seepat Road Bilaspur (C.G) 7. General Manager (Electronics and telecommunications) South Eastern Coal field Limited SECL-Bhavan, Seepat Road Bilaspur (C.G) 8. Director (Technical Operations) South Eastern Coal field Limited SECL-Bhavan, Seepat Road Bilaspur (C.G) 4 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUJT!ONOF INDIA F* XI-HC—78 ^ '3'^T ^II^Krt^, ^ttl^^Ko, f®j<rll^< ^ lO.P.(s)v^o. 3(^/1) *11HCTI «i*1ich •^Ft 200 3TT^?T'<:I^F (<l??Tl<s<<i?) 'B^T'^Tf^tNr 'cT^n sn^fT^iN? "~^ ^cTWT^rf^T ^TT^T SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohah Shrivastava. J 22-06-2011 Shri Y.S. Thakur, counsei fbrt respondent / SECL, a coal subsidi ventiiating his grievance arising representation against iower gradir Evaiuation Report (EER) for the year Learned counsel for the petiti memorandum dated 14/5/09 (Annexu Ministry of Personnel, Public Grieva 4/2/2010 oflhe Coai india Ltd. issuec Eastern Coalfieids Ltd. (SECL) to Government of india provides an opj: entries and final grading given in tj petitioner by making representation Learned counsel for the petitioner fu^ petitioner has submitterd his represe| P/7), which was required to be decidj petitioner has not been considered n<| more than one year has eiapsed. ^ <=hi€i(<n<flTi'^W^if ^* f^ft <P»i^i< ^^tfiTH^T^T le petitioner. Heard. The petitioner, who is pres^ntly working as Senior Manager in the ^ry company, has approached this Court ^n account of non-consideration of his (g and marks awarded in his Executive 12008-09. ibner draws attention of this Court to ofrice jre P/4) Jssued by the Government of india, ihces and Pensions as aiso drcular dated to various coai companies including South ^ubmit that the guidelines issued by the ^ortunity to make representation against the |ie report, which was duiy avaiied by the [against his grading for the year 2008-09. ijther submits that as per the guideiines, the jitation as eariy as on 4/5/2010 (Annexure ^d within a period of 30 days as directed in circuiar dated 4/2/2010 of the Coai in(Jia Ltd. However, the representation of the »rany decision communicated, even though /hen the first representation did not evoke any response, the petitioner subrfiitted repeated representations, the iast preferred on 25/26.05.2011. Learned counsei for the petit^ner submits that the Annual Performance Reports piay an important roie in l|ie matter of assessment of merit for the ..^^ .^, " ^"^A^" •'y^^y^7--' XI-HC—78 •^7 MWW[ »*lich v\ 'T^r ^(qi<r1,^, ^Tl1<H^(o, f^TRTy ^.P'^T^D. SVS^/1)^ 200 31T^TTT5W (^c(i^<^) 3TT^?T ^T f^^icb "cT^ 3TI^T 9h^lich Deepti ^TTW^f^T ^TT^T 5- purpose of promotion to the next under the binding instructions of the C oM^t<n<fli 'HTR^ff "^* fs^rt ipsi^K ^3TRm3TT^T igher post, in view of the guidelin^ of promotion of Executives to various gr^des, contained in memo dated 3/5.5.2011 (Annexure P/8). It is therefore subntiitted that the respondent No.3 is obiiged ^entrai Government and the Coal india Ltd. to decide the representation ofthe pe1|itioner within the stipuiated time. The guidelines issued by the (^overnment of india provide an opportunity to make representation against the e|itries and finai grading given in the report within a period of 15 days from th^ date of receipt of entries in the Annuai Performance Appraisai Report. it ha^ been stated on affidavit by the petitioner and letter dated 4/5/2010 (Annexure shows that the petitioner did prefer The instructions issued on 4/2/20101 respondents for consideration of repr^sentation within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of representation. consideration of his representation ag it wouid therefore be expec respondent No.3 to take approprial against APAR pertaining to the year '^ 3/7) has also been piaced on record v^hich lepresentation within the stipuiated period. by the Coal India Ltd. further obiige the Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to due ^inst the entries made in his case. !ient in the interest of justice to direct e decision on petitioner's representation 008-09 within a period of 30 days from the date of communication-ofthis order. i^ goes without saying, it is the finai decision taken in the matter of petitioner's reprjesentation and consequent grading arrived at, which shall form basis for cons|jeration of the case of the petitioner for promotion, as and when DPC is con^| next higher grade. With the aforesaid observationj ^ened to consider case of promotion to the ^, the petition is finatiy disposed off. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge