IMPORTANT POINT
Service Law - Promotion - Wrongful denial of dry of promotion, without looking in to his representation against the adverse remarks deserves to be depricated.

1. Petitioner, by filing this writ petition, has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 28.4.1999 (P/4), passed by respondent No.1. Record reveals that vide impugned order, revision filed by respondent No.2 under Sec.69 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 (in short the Act) was allowed by respondent No.1 and the petitioner was directed to consider case of respondent No.2 for promotion from the date when his juniors were promoted to the post of Junior Accountant i. e. w. e. f.1.1.1998 and to allow him all consequential benefits.

2. As per averments made in this writ petition, respondent No.2 was appointed as Junior Clerk with the petitioner on 14.6.1984. His service conditions are governed by the rules known as Punjab Cooperative financing Institution Service Rules, 1958 (in short the Service Rules ). Respondent No.2 was promoted to the post of Senior Clerk on 14.6.1991. As per rules, he was put on probation for a period of one year, which could have been extended upto 18 months, however, keeping in view work and conduct of respondent No.2, he was regularized in service w. e. f.5.6.1992 (Annexure R2/1 ). Name of respondent No.2 alongwith others, was considered for promotion to the post of Junior Accountant, however, keeping in view adverse remarks entered in his confidential reports for the year 1991 and 1992, he was ignored, whereas persons junior to him were promoted to the higher post. Respondent No.2 challenged said action of the petitioner by filing a revision under Sec.69 of the Act. After notice, revision was allowed by respondent No.1 vide order dated 28.4.1999, directing the petitioner to consider case of respondent No.2 for promotion to the post of Junior Accountant and to give him all consequential benefits. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Perusal of paper book indicates that in this writ petition, the petitioner, by referring to Rule 10 of the Service Rules and by-law 37 clause (iii) of the registered by-laws of the petitioner, has assailed the impugned order on the ground that respondent No.1 was not competent to exercise jurisdiction under Sec.69 of the Act. It is primary contention of counsel for the petitioner that dispute regarding promotion of respondent No.2 was not covered under the provisions of the Act, the respondent No.2 was ignored as per registered by-laws of the petitioner, as such, respondent No.1 has no jurisdiction to interfere in the matter, while exercising its revisional jurisdiction, as has been done in the present case.

4. Reading of paper book further reveals that on merits, nothing substantial has been said as to why respondent No.2 was not entitled to be promoted to the next higher post. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No.2, various allegations have been leveled against members of the Board of Directors, wherein it has been said that an attempt has been made to harass him and the bad entries in his confidential reports were made on account of malafides on part of the members of the Board of Directors. It has been stated that he has unnecessarily been put under suspension again and again. It has further been said that in the year 1992, respondent No.2 was promoted to the next post of Senior Clerk keeping in view his efficient work and conduct. His services were regularized on completion of one year probation period, which could have been extended upto 18 months.

5. Respondent No.2 has, further averred that on account of malafides on part of the petitioner, adverse remarks, for the period ending on 30.6.1991 and 31.3.1992 were communicated to him only in the month of September, 1997, against which, he has represented, but the same was not decided when his case for promotion to the next post was considered. Copy of the representation has been placed on record as Annexure R2/3. It has also been stated that thereafter, all confidential reports were good except for the year ending 31.3.1996, for which, period ACR is not availabl