The Controller General Of Defence Accounts vs. J.B.Sastry

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH

WRIT PETITION No. 13033 of 2005

O R D E R: (Per the Hon'ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari)

This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order dated 4.3.2005 passed in O.A. No. 588 of 2002 on the file of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary.

The respondent herein filed O.A. No. 588 of 2002 against the action of the petitioners herein in not considering his case for promotion. According to the respondent – applicant the DPC met in September, 2000 and pursuant to the said DPC the immediate junior of the applicant by name Sri Prabhakar Tiwari and some others were included. On 27.11.2000 promotions were given to the juniors superseding the applicant and the applicant made representation dated 9.4.2001 and he was informed that his case for the post of Accounts Officer was considered and the DPC found him 'not yet fit'. The petitioners – respondents before the Tribunal took the stand that the confidential reports for the period 1995-96 to 1999-200 were considered and the DPC on the basis of that confidential reports graded him 'average' whereas the bench mark required for the post is

'good' and therefore the case of the respondent – applicant could not be considered.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material available on record including the relevant DPC minutes and also the confidential reports of the applicant for the years 1995-96 to 1999-2000, the Tribunal disposed of the O.A. holding the findings of the DPC that the applicant as 'not yet fit' cannot be sustained and it would be appropriate to give directions to conduct review DPC and to consider the case of the applicant for promotion. The Tribunal further directed that review DPC be conducted within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Tribunal, the petitioners-authorities filed this writ petition.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal discloses that the Tribunal has gone into the findings arrived at by the DPC. It is well settled that such a course is not permissible unless it is shown that the process of assessment is vitiated either on the ground of bias, mala fides or arbitrariness. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that the order passed by the Tribunal requires modification by directing the petitioners herein to consider the case of the respondent – applicant by placing the same in the next meeting of the DPC.

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of modifying the order passed by the Tribunal and directing the petitioners that the respondent's case be placed before the next meeting of the DPC and his case be considered in accordance with the Rules. No costs.

T. MEENA KUMARI, J.

G. CHANDRAIAH, J.

Date: 7-6-2007.

MVB.