The right to consideration for promotion is a fundamental right, and after punishment for misconduct, the course available is to refer the matter before the Departmental Promotion Committee to determine if the punishment can be considered a rider for promotion.

JUDGMENT :

[Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.]

1. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the respondent nos.2 and 3, the respondents in the writ petition, have been impleaded as proforma respondent nos.1 and 2.

It has further been submitted that their names may be deleted on the basis of the fact that the erstwhile bank, namely, Vananchal Gramin Bank has been merged into Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank, therefore, an interlocutory application being I.A. No.754 of 2021 was filed seeking therein leave of this Court to implead Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank as respondent no.3.

The aforesaid interlocutory application was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 22.02.2021 by impleading Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank through its Chairman as respondent no.3.

Learned counsel for the appellant, therefore, submits that since the functionaries who have been impleaded as respondent nos.2 and 3 were the functionaries of the Vananchal Gramin Bank and after its merger with the Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank, they are no more necessary parties.

2. The assertion so made has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner.

3. Considering the aforesaid fact and taking into consideration the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 22.02.2021 in I.A. No.754 of 2021, permission sought for, is hereby, allowed.

4. Let necessary deletion be made in course of the day.

5. The instant intra-court appeal preferred under Clause-10 of Letters Patent is directed against the order/judgment dated 09.09.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.2422 of 2011, by which the decision of the respondent authority as contained in letter dated 17.08.2007, whereby and whereunder the decision has been taken not to give effect or open sealed cover in respect of the promotion of the writ petitioner as the departmental proceeding against the petitioner ended with inflicting punishment, has been quashed and set aside.

6. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, required to be enumerated, are as hereunder:-

It is the case of the writ petitioner that while the petitioner was working as Branch Manager at Ataula under the respondent Bank, a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner for the period when the petitioner was posted at Deori Cement factory Branch. Charges have been levelled against him for not fulfilling the norms of the Bank and for that the Bank has suffered a loss.

In the departmental proceeding the petitioner appeared and final order was passed on 25.6.2005 imposing punishment of recovery of Rs.20,000/- for the loss caused to the Bank. However, prior to the aforesaid punishment order, a seniority list was prepared by the respondent Bank on 29.11.2004 in which the petitioner was placed at serial No.15.

On 18.12.2004, one circular was issued for promotion from Junior Manager Grade I to Middle Manager Grade II, and number of posts has been shown to be vacant to which promotions were to be granted and written examination was to be held on 23.01.2005. In the said circular it was also stated that all those who fulfill the requisite qualification can apply. Subsequently, on 07.03.2005 a letter was issued which contained the names of the employees who have appeared and found successful in the written examination conducted for promotion. In the said list, the name of this petitioner stood at serial no. 1 under the heading of list of candidates who qualified in the written test for promotion to Middle Manager, Grade II.

Consequently, on 21.4.2005 promotion was given to several employees, however, it has been mentioned that those persons against whom Departmental Proceeding was initiated or likely to be initiated, their cases have been withheld. Thereafter, the respondent Bank also took a decision to open the sealed cover in cases where the departmental proceeding came to an end and accordingly, two persons were promoted. However, cases of thos