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

2016 Supreme(Ori) 687

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
I. MAHANTY & BISWAJIT MOHANTY, JJ.
State of Odisha and Others – Petitioners
Versus
Somnath Sahoo – Opposite Party
W.P. (C) No. 19909 of 2015
Decided On : 05-10-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. M. Sahoo.
For the Opposite Parties : M/s. Saumendra Ku. Mohapatra, D. Nayak, S.S. Mohapatra, M/s. B.P. Mohapatra, Ramesh Sahoo, Mrs. S. Pradhan and Ms. Gayatri Das.

The main legal point established is that the direction to open the sealed cover for promotion was legally vulnerable and set aside, directing consideration for ad hoc promotion in accordance with G.A. Department Resolution No. 14641 dated 4.7.1995.

Headnote:

Sealed Cover - Promotion - P.C. Act, 1988, Sections 13(2), 1(c)(d); IPC, Sections 409/468/417 - The court set aside the direction to open the sealed cover for promotion, directing instead to consider ad hoc promotion in accordance with G.A. Department Resolution No. 14641 dated 4.7.1995.

Fact of the Case:

The State of Odisha and its officers sought to quash the order directing to open the sealed cover for the promotion of an individual, who was facing criminal and disciplinary proceedings. The court found that the direction to open the sealed cover was legally vulnerable and set it aside, directing consideration for ad hoc promotion.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the direction to open the sealed cover for promotion was wrong and set it aside. It directed consideration for ad hoc promotion in accordance with G.A. Department Resolution No. 14641 dated 4.7.1995.

Issues: The main issue revolved around the legality of the direction of the Tribunal relating to opening of the sealed cover for promotion.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the direction to open the sealed cover for promotion was legally vulnerable and set it aside, directing consideration for ad hoc promotion in accordance with G.A. Department Resolution No. 14641 dated 4.7.1995.

Final Decision: The court set aside the direction to open the sealed cover for promotion and directed consideration for ad hoc promotion in accordance with G.A. Department Resolution No. 14641 dated 4.7.1995.

JUDGMENT :

BISWAJIT MOHANTY, J.

1. The State of Odisha and its officers have filed the present writ application praying for quashing of the order dated 20.7.2015 passed by the learned Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in O.A. No. 839 of 2014, whereby the learned Tribunal had directed to open the sealed cover in respect of promotion of opposite party no. 1 to the rank of Deputy Executive Engineer and Executive Engineer from the date his junior was promoted, if he was otherwise found suitable for such promotion and if there was no other legal impediment. While passing the impugned order dated 20.7.2015, the learned Tribunal had made it clear that the promotion given to the opposite party no. 1 shall only be ad hoc, subject to final result of vigilance case/departmental proceeding pending against him and petitioner no. 1 is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per rules after conclusion of the said vigilance case/departmental proceeding.

2. The case of the petitioners is that the learned Tribunal had illegally given the above direction notwithstanding pendency of Vigilance P.S. Case No. 8 of 2007 and Vigilance P.S. Case No. 8 of 2008 against him and so also pendency of disciplinary proceeding against opposite party no. 1. According to the petitioners, in 2007, Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case No. 8 of 2007 was registered against opposite party no. 1 on the allegation of misappropriation of government money towards cost of rice received under F.F.W. and SGRY Scheme without executing any work. Again in 2008, Bhubaneswar Vigilance Case No. 8 of 2008 has been registered against opposite party no. 1 on the allegation of acquiring disproportionate assets. Further, according to the petitioners in Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case No. 8 of 2007, cognizance of offences was taken by the appropriate court on 5.7.2012. While so, on 6.3.2013, charge memo was issued to opposite party no. 1 vide Annexure-3 to the Original Application No. 839 of 2014 filed by opposite party no. 1, which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ application. On receipt of the charge sheet in disciplinary proceeding on 3.6.2013, opposite party no. 1 has filed his written statement on defence vide Annexure-4 attached to O.A. No. 839 of 2014. During pendency of the disciplinary proceeding, on 30.10.2013, learned Vigilance Court, Bhubaneswar took cognizance of offence under Section 13 (2) read with Section 1 (c) (d) of the P.C. Act, 1988 and Sections 409/468/417 of I.P.C. against the opposite party no. 1 and others in T.R. Case No. 44 of 2012. On 3.12.2013, the Enquiry Officer was appointed in order to enquire into the allegation made in the charge memo dated 6.3.2013. In such background, on 21.2.2014, Departmental Promotion Committee sat to consider the case of Assistance Executive Engineer for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer. According to the petitioners, on account of pendency of two Vigilance/Criminal Proceedings and the departmental proceeding though the case of opposite party no. 1 was considered for promotion, however, the same was put in sealed cover. Again on 22.2.2014, D.P.C. sat to consider the case of promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer to Executive Engineer. Again on account of pendency of criminal proceeding as well as disciplinary proceeding, the case of opposite party no. 1 was considered and put in sealed cover. When the juniors were given promotion to the rank of Deputy Executive Engineer and Asst. Executive Engineer; on 21.3.2014, the opposite party no. 1 filed representation to petitioner no. 1 for promoting him to the rank of Deputy Executive Engineer and Executive Engineer from the date when his juniors got promotion. Sometime thereafter, opposite party no. 1 has filed O.A. No. 839 of 2014 before the learned Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar with prayer to open the sealed cover and to give him promotion to the rank of Deputy Executive Engineer and Executive Engineer from the date his junior Lingaraj Gou










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
whatsapp-icon Back to top