IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to communicate adverse reports to the concerned individual and the application of natural justice principles in considering promotional opportunities.

ORDER :

1. By way of the instant petition, the petitioner is challenging the action on the part of the respondent authorities whereby the petitioner was not granted the benefit of time scale pay in view of circulars dated 28.04.2008 & 17.03.1999.

2. Brief facts of the case as mentioned in the petition, are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Veterinary Assistant Surgeon vide order dated 10.09.1997 and joined his service on 07.10.1997. On 06.10.1999, petitioner successfully completed the period of probation. The petitioner completed more than 15 years of his service, but till date he has not been granted the single promotion. The erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh framed the scheme known as "Time Bond Promotion Scheme". According to the said scheme, an employee, who has completed 12 years of his service would be entitled for the benefit of time scale pay and after completion of his 24 years of his service, he would be granted the further benefit of time scale pay. The State of Chhattisgarh vide notification dated 28.04.2008 took a policy decision to grant the benefit of time scale pay to the Government employee (gazetted officer, class-II) after completion of 8 years of his service and 16 years of his service, so far as the petitioner is concerned, he was appointed in the year 1997 and completed his 8 years of service and, therefore he should have been entitled for benefit of first time scale pay as on 01.04.2006. The employees, who were juniors to the petitioner, have already been granted the benefit of time scale pay vide order dated 30.09.2009 (Annexure P/2). Annexure P/3 is the copy of the relevant portion of the seniority list of Veterinary Assistant Surgeons showing the position as on 01.04.2009 and in the said list, the name of the petitioner is at serial no. 224. The employees appointed after 1997 have already been granted the benefit of time scale pay. According to the general instructions issued by the department, the criteria for promotion from class-II to class-I is seniority subject to fitness. The information furnished under the Right to Information Act dated 21.11.2011 (Annexure P/5) shows that the criteria for promotion was seniority subject to fitness and the confidential role of preceding five years will be considered. When the department issued the order dated 30.09.2009, the petitioner made a representation to the department for grant of benefit of time scale pay. Annexure P/6 is the copies of the representations made by the petitioner for redressal of his grievances from 2009 to 2012. The Joint Director informed the petitioner vide its letter dated 08.11.2010 (Annexure P/7) that in view of the recommendation of the departmental scrutiny committee, the petitioner was not found fit for grant of time scale pay though he has completed 8 years of his service. The petitioner was informed that due to adverse entry in the confidential role of the petitioner, he was not granted the benefit of time scale pay, but at no point of time, any adverse report in the confidential role was communicated to the petitioner and no opportunity to improve his work or conduct was afforded. Despite repeated requests, the copies of the confidential role/adverse entry, were not supplied to the petitioner. Hence, this petition has been filed by the petitioner for following reliefs:-

“1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders against the respondent authorities and they may kindly be directed to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the circular dated 28.04.2008 (Annex.P/1) and the authorities may kindly be directed to decide the representations of the petitioner (Annex.P/6) in light of the aforesaid circular dated 28.04.2008 within a stipulated time, and the petitioner may also kindly be granted all the consequential benefits.

2. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the af