m /^ r \ BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATI8GARH AT BILASPUR. . !2>| O, W.P(S)NO.'.':.'../201Q Petitioner: Respondents: ^-y ^M^ 'n^\^" \'-? y ^R.K. Verma, S/o Bhaiyya Lal, Aged about 43 years Executive Engineer I/C, PubUc Works Department, Gariyabandh, Raipur Division, Raipur CG State. Versus 1. State ofChhatisgarh, Through : Secretary, Public Works Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur. 2. CG State Public Service Commission Thru: Secretary, Raipur, CG State. 3. The Engineer-in-Chief, Public Works Department Raipur, CG State. 4. Shri Janwade, Engineer-in-Chief, Public Works Department, Raipur, CG State. 5. Shri Vijay Kumar Bhatpahri, Superintending Engineer, PublicWorks Department, Bilaspur Circle, Bilaspur, CG State. wfwHty^^-^ns^^y^**w^^^^^^f. ;^^^gs^y L^*^^^ri.mw?w^^ ^^^^i^^^^^jHnT-_J.1^^;rijt4^^}:^ ^i;.i:]Ht{ llp^. ^6. ShriSantosh Kuniar Kori, Chief Engineer, Publie Works Department, National High Way Circle, Raipur, CG State. ^ 7.8hri R.B. Mangrulkar Chief Engineer, Public Works Departnient, Jagadalpur CG State. WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS/ ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, ETC. .il'r' 3C—71 ~?=r ^iqKni, ®fl|<H'iia,fsjdiyy,< ^^^)W,\-i.\ojl^\o 3?-lt?TqiI •B«?roii^T ?^mre ^lta antw qiNcpih iTFiwTf ^' fs^ Tfgre^ii ^sffiRaTl^T SB : Hon'ble Shri Manlndra Mohan Bhrivastava. J. 16-07^010 Shri K. R. Nair, counsel for the Shri V. V. S. Murthy, Deputy laetitioner- *^ !Advocate General with Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer for the State/re^pondents No.1 & 3. Shri A. S. Kaohhawaha, couns^l for respondent No.2/P.S.C. Shri Anup Majumdar with $hri Sourabh Dangi, counsel for respondents No.4 & 7. Shri P. S. Koshy, counsel for rejspondent No.5. Shri Amrito Das, counsel for re^pondent No.6. Heard on applteation (I.A.No.2 03-2010 filed by the respondents No. for vacating stay order dated 22-03-2C 22-03-2010, this Court directed Committee meeting may be held till th| .2j) for vacating stay order dated 22- .|1 & 3 and the application (t.A.No.3) 2Q10 filed bythe respondent No.4. On (hat no Departmental R-omotion th^ next date of hearing, Submission of learned couns^l for the respondents is that the T'^,- petitioner is at present, substantiv^ty holding the post of Assistant Engineer and his claim for promotion jto the next higher post of Executive Engineer is pending consfcleration be|ore this Court, therefore, the interim order, by which, Departmental Prom()tion Committee meeting has been stayed, may be vacated. Learned ooi^isel for the State/respondents No.1 & 3 and respondent No.4 in support <^f their applioation for vacating stay, jJ ^ ..N. =' '" •V'tS^^' ^Sf •^WW'ii, ®Til«'IS,1a<''1l'M'J,< v<j ,^(?.)i^, ai°/^l° 311^1 T5R?('^f3^?) sf^V W k-i w sn^i »ii<ti ^aiwofw 3ii^i z- •*w!<-)<j1;TW?ff <f ft'Zl' TfSRSK qrafiwian^t submitted that petitioner's claim for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer and for ke^ping one post of Chief Engineer vacant till the petitioner becomes eligil! le for the said post, are farfetchect and could not be granted under the la^. It is submitted that though in the departmentat enquiry, the petitioner w^is exonerated, matter was referred for enquiry into the petittoner's cast^ status as the petitioner initially claimed his status as Scheduled Caste year 2000 started claiming ~ Schedul authority namely "The State Level Higl~ passed an order on 10-11-2008 (Anr' held that the petittoner has falsely obtjained the caste oertificate, though he does not belong to the Soheduled for promotion to the next higher post i in the year 1992 and thereafter in pd Tribe status. The competent Power Caste Scrutiny Committee" pxure P-13) wherebyit has been and on this oount alone, interim orcjer granted earlier by this Court, deserves to be vacated. It is also Tribe. Therefore, petitioner's claim i reserved category is not tenabte submitted that in view of this subsequent development, the petitionef though has been exonerated from the charges in the departmentat enqL|iry and even if upon opening the sealed cover, he is found fit fbr promt)tion against the post of reserved category (Scheduled Tribe), he canno< be promoted, as now there is an order of the competent authority decl^ring that the petitioner does not '(55<iIISi',i:RT-l':<?rra'—FS/147—2/2U10—1,00,000. ~3^r '<ii-4i<')4, 'aflSy'is, [sx'iiyy .te)...f;.L^..^.:.i..'2:lo/^.L?. 'T^T ( sn^c^ilSFim WIT 3(1^1 iaiflni T8nwTifi?(r sii^i •r)' !belong to the Scheduted Tribe oate^ respondents further submits that the pe< isubstantive post of Assistant Engineer. Ithe post of Superintending Engineer ^ iEngineer vaoant, is baseless and unle^ ipromoted to the post of Executive Engin^ ithe post of Superintending Engineer. Ipetitioner has made an attempt to misj |document (Annexure P-13) and the ope( lconcealed from the notice of this Court isubmitted that the complete order has respondent No.4 as Annexure R/4-14 wtli !been directed by the Caste Scrutiny Ihe petitioner be cancetled and ateo oanc^l reserved oategory candidate on the fX3st further aotion against erring certifcate issj Learned counsel for respondent respondent No.5 is concerned, he betonj and irrespeotive ofthe decision ofthe pe( qirawft^ •inq^'iiIs'st 3D^t ^ )ory. Leamed counsel for the litioner has been reverted to his fherefbre, claim for promotion to jnd keeping one post of Chief js the petitioner is substantwety jer, hecannot claim promotbn to It has been argued that the ^ad the Court by not filing the (ative part has been deliberately |to obtain the interim order. It is [been plaoed on record by the lerein in its operative part, it has Cohimittee that caste certifioate of the petitioner's appointment as ijifAssistant Engineer and to take ^iing authority. INo.5 submitted that as far as fis to Scheduled Caste category |ition, the petitioner has no claim 5Tra^T ?^T ^"TT^f, .^r-T^Fi^ —FS/147—2/2010—1,00,000. T .<•,- ,-?•--' 'g "^ \.'k,^y ""'teB- SIi^IW^IW 'tWT Sff^T sr>*<iq» 'TST «4]'4i<Ti<<, (S'flWKo, fs|tiiy^< . w,P.(s-^-\2-'c'/^o'T) nra? sfl^i'^wCyI^^) s«iifljl<tiRsn ^n^^ •^ for promotion on the post reser^ therefore, interim order needs to l|>e vacated/properly modified. Replying to afbresaid co counsel for the petitioner submitt^d that he has been subjected to gross harassment and victimization. H^ was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee held on 2 post of Executive Engineer whi)e| On account of pendency of dep^ stand, even though, the petitionei] duly and honourably exonerated the respondents ought to have im ^nRrat7i 'wraS <f ft^t <f"t^i( ^aiRmsii^f ed Ibr Scheduled Caste category, and itentions of the respondents, learned 5-12-2005 for regular promotion to the |working as ad hoo Executive Engineer. Irtmental enquiry, whteh had no legs to was considered and presumably found fit, he was not promoted. Vide or()er dated 16-02-2006, the petitioner was from att the allegations, and therefore, mediately opened the sealed oover and given effect to the recommer|dations. It is argued that this was deliberately not done bythe resp4ndents No.1 & 3/State and respondents No.5 to 7 were instrumental in e isuring that petitioner does not get the benefit of promotion. On 17-06-2Cp6, respondents No.5 to 7, juniors to the petitioner, were promoted withou|t opening the sealed cover and acting upon the recommendations of tl|ie promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. Thereafter, again on 1^-09-2007, respondents No.5 to 7 were further promoted to the post of ^^iperintending Engineer and in order to s!re^n?t*T5s;"irei',i:pT-T<nifl—FS/147—2/2010—1,00,000. ^^^ y E-HC-7&' J >-'^ ^Pts!'??T'f?;fe 'asn sntn grqjsT ^=r '<<|<II^<T, ^atwre, ^rray: .W.P-/-?,^^ l'2-l0/^0'^ T sn^TTRT (ipfgq^q) extend undue advantage to his reoommendations of Departmental Fjromotion Committee held on 25-12- 2005, was not opened, without any proceeded to held Departmental Pr wfeNN-WTCff-^'fs%t ^sifwsnt?! juntors, sealed cover containing tlecision, now the respondents have »motion Committee for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer. As resfjondents No.5 to 7 are junior to the petituner, who have been allowed Vp march-past the petitioner in a well designed and hatched conspiracy, js not liabte to be vacated. It is furths block petitioner's promotional aveni referred to the State Levet Cast^ learned counsel for the petitioner, Caste Scrutiny Committee is illegj challenged before this Court by filif 2009) wherein an interim orderj (Annexure P-16) that no steps pur^i te interim order passed by this Court r submitted that in order to somehow le, fatee and frivolous complaint was Scrutiny Committee. According to he order passed by the State Level and the same has atready been g a writ petitton (W.P.(S)No.2061 of has been passed on 20-04-2009 lant to the impugned order dated 10- 11-2008 shaN be taken till the neijt date of hearing, and therefore, the order of the State Level Caste Scn|itiny Committee could not come in the way of opening sealed oover and ^iving effect to the recommendations of Departmental Promotion Committ^e and atso consider the case of the 3ilt?I'^[^lJ WTTSn^IWIW 7^ '<ii'4id'4, ®iil'H'is,fsidiy^i —..^..•.??...(?-lr?.l^]..?/.?:.6J...°. Sii^T '7??i' (licli'lnl<t?t) ^<iiw<!fet sn^f 4- petitioner for ftjrther promotion to W^ post of Superintending Engineer and Chief Engineer. have taken into considera counsel for the partjes. Though, it is true that petiti^ner was oonsidered for promotion by Departmental Promotion Committe^ held on 25-12-2005 and as he was exonerated from the departmental the post of Executive Engineer was| ^•>I^^<4^ ~c?T^f "^ t^T3t 11^$!^. ^faiRiRsn^i ion the submissbn made by learned ;harges vide order dated 16-02-2006, it is not disputed before this Court ttjiat complaint relating to caste status of the petitioner was referred to the St^te. Level Caste Scrutiny Committee. It would thus be seen that the case cjfthe petitioner was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committe^ on 25-12-2005, regular promotbn to not given to the petittoner on account of dispute with regard to petition^r's caste status as the matter was pending before the State Level Qaste Scrutiny Committee. The State Level Caste Scrutiny Committee ha^ now passed an order on 10-11 -2008 (Annexure P-13) holding that the p^itioner is not entitled to claim status of Soheduled Tribe and cfirected cancpllation of his caste certificate as also his appointment as reserved categ^ry candkJate on the post of Assistant Engineer. The same has been ch^llenged tefore this Court and there is an interim order operating in favoijr of the petitioner. However, the fact ^ t^ fc .-w^ y»«(.j '^ s -7i iS.<l ^if IVW "^TC SH^ ^W^} --1 d-ccj "ill^Kiq, ®Tl)<-|<|<»,[^diyy \,^.lf .($'•) fW.l'L^/^lo sn^cTa^ (' -~) ^T^f^^T -^^ ?f f^t^- ^f^i^X ^aiRn an^i remains that caste status of the Though, a proteotive order has beerj measure, the order ofthe State Lev^l is not in dispute that the petitionej category candidate. It has not beer) even as a gegeral category candidaf The petitioner is presently hokJing th| as the claim of opening sealed cov^r allowed and such relief is granted to| date that the petitioner would be enti): post of Superintending Engineer Engineer. nay be protected by dira;ting the re] petitioner for promotion to the po^ t)etitioner is under serious dispute. given to the petitioner as an interim Caste Scrutiny Committee stands. It is claiming promotion as resewed demonstrated by the petitioner that je, he would be entitted to promotion. post of Assistant Engineer. In so far jr is ooncerned, even if the petitibn is |the petitioner, it cannot be said as on led to a direotion for promotion to the promotion to the post of Chief ancl further In case, in the event, the petitfon is allowed, the petitioner's interest benefits. Moreover, the interim ord^r operates against promotion to the various posts of Executlve Enginee^ Engineer. ^pondents to consider the case of the it as olaimed with all oonsequential , Superintending Engineer and Chief XI-HC—:7g^i!'R S s<l$?t qil f^iNr gaian^l Tumane ^sf "ill<ll<n<4,. ®iily'li<o,[°«?II'H'J,< IA;, P,CS,) Wi.^l-la/^-o ^ 31T??T'(ra^i'(' ?^iwafCT 3)i^i in these ciroumstances, int^rim on 22-03-2010 is vacated. Howev^i if any, made by the respondents ^l petitton. "^ Aocorctingly, I.A.No.2and I.^.No.3 arestanddisposedof. <^l^4l'i 'XTP:?^f ^^^ <^i^i< ^sifaHsn^i int^rim order passed by this Court earlier }r, promotion of respondents No.5 to 7, jhall be subjast to final decision of this Sd-/ Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge s .^u ^