1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1555/1996 Dr. Mrs. Jay Shree Purkayastha Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order : 02/09/2009 Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Chaudhari Mr. Vinod Goyal for Mr. Virendra Lodha, for petitioner. Dr. Vibhuti B. Sharma, Addl. Govt. Counsel for respondent-State. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner joined as Civil Assistant Surgeon in the year 1979 by way of regular mode of selection through RPSC. The petitioner appeared in Post Graduate Entrance Examination conducted by the Government of Rajasthan as inservice candidate and qualified. She was given provisional admission in Gyanecology and Obstertics and was asked by the respondents to produce a certificate of her having rendered rural service. She submitted certificate but was not considred, so she filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3520/1989 and an interim order was passed in her favour by the Court on 29.08.1989. Ultimately, by order dated 13.12.1990, the writ petition was allowed and she was allowed to complete her studies. Seniority list was issued on 08.08.1990 showing the position of Medical Officers as on 01.01.1990 wherein name of petitioner appeared at Serial No.223 (Annexure-1) whereas names of Gori Shankar, Sudhindra Kumar, Bhatnagar, Nathu Singh, Mahendra Kumar 2 Sharvan, Smt. Sudha Mathur and Shankar Lal appeared at Serial Nos. 224, 229, 230, 231, 233, 234 respectively. In the year 1992, the petitioner submitted application seeking prior permission for proceeding on a foreign assignment of the Government of Libya but as no reply was received, the petitioner proceeded with foreign assignment and returned back on 22.07.1994. Later on, she was posted at Government Hospital, Bharatpur in September 1994 and later on transferred to Settelite Hospital, Sethi Colony, Jaipur vide order dated 22.06.1995. By order dated 22.06.1995, the petitioner was superseded in promotion from the post of Medical Officer to the post of Junior Specialist/Senior Specialist and persons junior to her, referred above in para 11 of the petition, were promoted for the reason that a departmental inquiry is pending/contemplated against the petitioner. Though neither any show cause notice nor any chargesheet had been served upon her till date. By another order dated 29.02.1996, 44 Junior Officers were promoted, though, her service record had been totally unblamished and no adverse remark has ever been communicated to her. It was furhter alleged that the petitioner may further be harashed by displacing her from present place of posting to remote place. It was prayed that respondents may be directed to promote the petitioner to the post of Junior Specialist/Senior Specialist from the date persons junior to her have been promoted with all consequalial benefits 3 and to grant her seniority on the basis of her promotion and further prayed that the petitioner may not be transfered on account of filing writ petition. Respondents did not file reply in spite of seeking time to file reply on 17.08.2005. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner could not have been superseded only on the basis of contemplated inquiry, hence, the petition may be accepted and direction may be issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion and grant her promotion from the date her juniors have been promoted. On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has rightly been superseded on account of departmental inquiry pending against her. It is admitted position that in the seniority list dated 08.08.1990 (Annexure-1) petitioner's name appears at Serial No.223 whereas names of Gori Shankar, Sudhindra Kumar, Bhatnagar, Nathu Singh, Mahendra Kumar Sharvan, Smt. Sudha Mathur and Shankar Lal appear at Serial Nos. 224, 229, 230, 231, 233, 234 respectively. It is also admitted position that vide order dated 22.06.1995 and 29.02.1996, persons junior to the petitioner have been promoted to the post of Junior Specialist/Senior Specialist and petitioner has been superseded. 4 Leared counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been superseded on the pretext of departmental inquiry pending/contemplated against her. The respondents have not filed reply to the petition and learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to submit whether departmental inquiry was initiated or not and if initiated, what was the fate of inquiry. In the absence of any reply or record, it cannot be inferred that only on account of contemplated/initiated departmental inquiry, petitioner's promotion has been withheld and she has been superseded. In such circumstance, only direction can be issued to the respondents is to consider the petitioner's case for promotion and if she is found suitable for promotion on the date on which her juniors were promoted to the post of Junior Specialist/Senior Specialist, the petitioner may also be promoted on that post with all consequential benefits. Hence, the petition is accepted and respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion within a period of three months and promote the petitioner on the post of Junior Specialist/ Senior Specialist from the date her junior Medical Officers were promoted, if petitioner is found suitable for promotion on that day with all consequential benefits. (K.S. Chaudhari) J. Mohit