L * hawani Shar Tari S/ Sri De ahdan Tiwar aéed abou 45 ars. ccup. Panayat and l' Ed e od Socia ucation 0(ganisr, pste t orba, Ds iaspur (MR) a K ist Bl Hl§ CQUR! QF CHHATTI§GARH &T BILASPQR W. P. (S) No. 1461 of 2005 ~ Petier iton Vrsu3 espodents . The Se cf MP. (N CG. throu, Seceta, Panayat a Soda! WWare em. hoa. e 1 tat ow ) gh rry ch nd e D Bpi . Direcior anchaat and Socia! ‘ WeWate Deptt. Bhopai. SB: Hb on'ie M. r Juice st Sh atis K. Aqnt‘ ihori J shii ra P dvat or th m. Jitend am Aoce f e petoner Shri Ssi! Dubey‘ Government .Advacat for t reegondts. uh e he en (assed on this '“ day af March, 2007; 1. By way o tis petitie th pet€oner seeks a dectio-o th respcentrto conser hs ase or fomotion on the pt of strict uditar; Di A Leed cou, ppearing for the petition. smits tht vide 2. am nsel a er ub a order ted 27.41? (Annexure N1) the etitioner as appointe da 97 p w d on th oet of 'Panchayat and Scia Education rganzer in th e p ol Oi e Paayat ni Wif en Ii v oder nch adSocai eare Departmt. hereaier. ide r dated 28.5.1983 (Annexuire N2) the petitioner .wae 5ent, on deputation on the best of .Biock Development Officer in the Panchayat and Rurai Development Department. As per the gradation iist dated 1.4.1985 (Annexure P13) the petitioner was pieced at serial No. 490 in his parent department. While the petitioner was on deputation. vide order dated 10.1 .1986 (Annexure ~ A113) one shri Rai Shambhu Nema. who Was placed at serial ‘No. B nke iw o h w N i, t ye a ch Rn 2 , Py GRDER P 23 f h n e ti irnt e nds id i c f p os 508 in the gradation list. was promoted an the post of District Auditor. Thereafter also vide order dated 25.1.1989 four persons placed at serial numbers 541, 554, 558 and 581 in the seniority list were promoted on the post of District Auditor. The petitioner come to know that on both the occasions when junior to the petitioners were considered for promotion and promoted to the post of District Auditor, the name ot the petitioner was not considered by the D.P.C. a5 his name was not placed before it. Thereafter, vide order dated 1.1 .1992 the petitioner was repatriated to the parent department. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the similarly situated officers, who were sent on deputation as Biock Development Officers were denied promotion with effect from the ’ date their juniors were considered for promotion in the Panohayat and Social Deveiopment Department i.e. parent department, on the ground that their juniors were considered and promoted. earlier when they were on deputation. They approached the M. P. State Administrative Tribunal at Jabalpur. The Tribunal vide its judgment and order dated June 8/30, 1992 dismissed their applications. in Special Leave Petition, after grant of leave, preferred against the order of the Tribunal i.e., Civil Appeat No. 4614-20 of 1992 the ‘ Hon‘ble Supreme Court of lndia observed as under :- "B_e mates it may, the appellants cannot be put to any prejuctce so far as their seng‘ce career in the parent Department is concemed in whatever capacity they were working in their parent Department, they would be deemed to be continuing in that capacity while onitiep‘utation as BDOs in the Panchayat and Rural Development Department. The appellants are entitled to all those benefits in'their parent Department which are given to the persons junior to them or those who are similarty situated. In case any of the’persons junior to the appeliants have been promoted to the higher cadres during the period when the \ l&jl'vr V “:35 . .ve appaflants were on depufa?icn. the Sfate cf Madhya .Pradesh shaf! consider the appellants for pmmcfion mam the rekvanf dates when {he persons junior to them were considered In case fhe appellants are found suitabie for promotion aner consiabranon, they will be entitied to all the ccn benefifs," I ‘ such uentl‘ai ,7, of in the same term and conditions of the order dated 14.2.1995 péssed by‘the Hon $upreme Court in Civil Appeai st cos. 5. in View of the above this petition is disposed s 'bie No.3 4614-20 or 1992. No order as to' , Sdl- l \ _ Satish K. Agni-howl 7‘ “iJudge Thakur a \ ’ ’