-1- IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE JURISDICTION JURISDICTION JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.5018 OF 2008 NO.5018 OF 2008 NO.5018 OF 2008 Union of India and others ...Petitioners v/s Shri V.B. Ambekar ...Respondent Mr V.S. Masurkar i/b Mrs Neeta V. Masurkar for Petitioners. Mr R.P. Saxena for Respondent. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND J.P. DEVADHAR JJ. DATE : 14TH JULY 2008. -2- P.C. :- 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner - Union of India challenges the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai dated 30th November 1997 in original application No.357 of 2002. By that order, the C.A.T. has directed that the petitioner should be given the promotional post from 1st July 1995. The Tribunal has also observed that the case of the petitioner was not considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee in 1995. In our opinion, the Tribunal could not have directed the Government to promote the respondent from 1997. The most that could have been done by the C.A.T. was to direct the Government to reconvene the D.P.C. for consideration of the case of the petitioner for promotion as on 1st July 1995. The Tribunal could have further direct that in case the D.P.C. finds that the petitioner is entitled to the promotional post, then he should be given that post from 1st July 1995. In our opinion, the Tribunal has committed grave error in issuing direction to give promotion from 1st July 1995 without even requiring -3- consideration to the D.P.C. In our opinion, therefore, it would be in the interest of justice to set aside the order impugned and send the matter back to the C.A.T. for de novo consideration and decision in accordance with law. In the result therefore, petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 30th November 2007 is set aside. original application No.357 of 2002 is remitted back to the C.A.T. for de novo consideration and decision in accordance with law. Hearing of the matter before the C.A.T. is expedited. . Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Sheristedar / Private Secretary as true copy. . Certified copy expedited. ( D.K. DESHMUKH J.) ( J.P. DEVADHAR J.)