ORDER :

1. The Petitioner by the instant petition seeks following reliefs:

“10.1 This Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record of the petitioner from the possession of the respondents/authorities;

10.2 This Hon’ble court further be pleased to issue appropriate direction in pursuance of the letter dated 26.06.2021 by respondent no.4 to the Additional Secretary for consideration of the case of the petitioner.

10.3 Any other relief as may be deemed fit and proper may also be granted to the petitioner.”

2. Facts of the case are that the Petitioner was appointed as a Block Development Officer on probation for a period of 2 years vide order dated 19.2.1999 (Annexure P1). He joined the services on the said post on 6.3.1999 and also successfully completed his probation period. He was also granted benefit of first time pay scale vide order dated 25.2.2011 (Annexure P5). As per Rules 13 and 14 of the Madhya Pradesh Government Panchayat and Rural Development (Gazetted) Services Recruitment Rules, 1988 (henceforth ‘the Rules of 1988’), minimum qualifying period for promotion from the post of Block Development Officer to the post of District Development Officer is 8 years and as per the amendment dated 26.7.1996 made in the Rules of 1988 a new post of Additional Assistant Development Commissioner was created and the Block Development Officer was to be promoted as Additional Assistant Development Commissioner in 4 years and subsequently the Additional Assistant Development Commissioner was to be promoted as Deputy Commissioner (Development) after 5 years. Since the yardstick required to be applied for promotion as also for grant of next time pay scale are almost same, instead of granting him time pay scale, the Petitioner should have been extended benefit of promotion as has been done in the case of 9 Block Development Officers vide order dated 30.7.2012 who were juniors to the Petitioner pursuant to the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) meeting convened on 4.7.2012. The promotion of the Petitioner has been denied by the DPC on the ground of non-availability of his annual confidential reports (ACRs). The case of the Petitioner has not been considered and his case has been kept in abeyance for the reason that the department has not placed the ACRs of the Petitioner before the DPC. The Petitioner has made multiple applications to the department for granting him promotion, but, the department has not considered his applications. Hence, the instant petition.

3. In the return, the Respondents/State made pleadings that the Petitioner is required to submit his self assessment report before his immediate controlling officer who will then forward the same to further higher officers, i.e., reporting officer, reviewing officer and finally accepting officer. The Petitioner failed to submit his assessment in prescribed format, therefore, the ACRs available with the department of the Petitioner are of the years 2002, 2003, 2009, 2017, 2018 and 2021 only. Various letters were also sent to the Petitioner to furnish copies of the ACRs if available with him, but, nothing has been provided by the Petitioner. Therefore, the Petitioner is not entitled to get any relief and the petition of the Petitioner deserves to be dismissed.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that promotion of the Petitioner has not been considered only on account of non-availability of his annual confidential reports (ACRs) for the years from 2007 to 2010. He further submits that grant of time pay scale is equivalent to promotion and the person is only entitled to time pay scale when he possesses all equivalent qualifications for promotion. The time pay scale has already been granted to the Petitioner. Meaning thereby, the Petitioner fulfills all the qualifications required for promotion. Therefore, he was entitled to get promotion instead of time pay scale. Once the department granted him time pay scale, means the Petitioner was fit for promoti