m tne High court of Judicature 33 Bxmwagcmatisnqam) was. no.4378’of o4. Petitionerz- 5.5. mpuri. Med about years, 9/0 Sub‘mvisional offioéx’'. Telecan. Civil Lines, Raipurwhhatishgaxh stats.) Juhior 3/0 shriB,u‘ Te awn£§ 0 :uri, cer, Working as (21/21 wL/{I u Venus Respondmtsr l. The Bharat Smcnér Nicsn Limited (A Gavt.' of India &It erpriSe Thmugh its Chaiman &M£m Direétor, w DELHI. mha 2, ine isqarh auef Telecan general circle, Manag eru'elacan), . Raip 113-4 92001 . 3. Petition WA 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuanca of Writ o£mandanus/Ccrticrari/ Qua warranto in the nature cf- Writ/order or Directions to Resgondents. x ' §% . $a Y The petitioner’s case is th him and in that enquiry Vide 0rd of Withholding of one annual im General Manager, the petitioner before respondent No,2- Chief ( after elapse of four years that ap; Counsel for the petitione decided to hold DPC for promoti decided before the DPC meets the In View of the above fac respondent No.2 be directed to ( ‘ held, to this position learned coui Having heard learned cou. facts and circumstances of the c proper that the appeal of the p decided before the DPC meets, more than 4 years‘and respom appeal. It is therefore, directed t selection for higher posts, Whichd With the direction aforesaid the J In View of this order, I A Np 9856/04 stands disposed of/ Certified copy as per rules at a regular enquiry was conducted against 3r dated 15.122001 (Annexure P—3) a penalty :rement was imposed, Against this order of has preferred an appeal, which is pending ieneral Manager’since 13.3.2001 and even eal is not being decided by respondent No.2. r submits that now the respondentshave 3n and in case the petitioner’s appeal is not n the petitioner will suffer irreparable loss. 't, the limited prayer of petitioner is that lecide the appeal before the DPC meeting is ise‘l for the respondents has no objection. isel for the parties and having regard to the ase in the'opinion of the court it is just and etitioner pending before respondent No.2 is as the appeal is already pending since last lent No.2 has not been able to decide the hat respondent shall decide the appeal of the er is earlier. )etition stands disposed of petitioner within a period of three months or before the DPC meets for XI—HC-22 v}? W °l 1% [‘3 m W W mm mm WWW W u'm’éh'%WW $W 311w 7.4.2005 Shri Ratan Pusty, counsel ”or the petitionar. Shri V.V.S.Murthy, Standing Counsel for the respondents. Heard.