SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 103

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY
Nutanarvind – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

2. This appeal by special leave arises from the order dated December 22, 1994 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 1796 of 1989.

3. We had issued notice to the respondents to show to this Court whether the consideration for promotion was on merit and ability or seniority-cum-merit and what was the principle that was followed in grading the Officers by the DPC. Pursuant to the said notice, learned counsel for the Union of India has brought to our notice the instructions issued by the Government of India and was in vogue prior to May 12, 1988. The Administrative Instructions contained in Memorandum of the Government dated 17th May, 1957 which was approved by this Court in Union of India etc. v. Majji Jangamayya etc.1. This Court had accepted the criteria laid down in those instructions which were as under :

"1. Greater emphasis should be laid on merit as a criterion.

2. The Departmental Promotion Committee should first decided the field of choice, namely, the number of eligible officers awaiting promotion who should be considered for inclusion in the selection list. An officer of outstanding















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top