IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J.
Dr. K. Balu – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Health Medical & Family Welfare Department, Hyderabad and Others – Respondents
I.A. No. 1 Of 2023 In/and W.P. No.25505 Of 2018
Decided On : 12-10-2023
Writ Petition - Promotion Issue - G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999 - The court discussed the legal provisions of G.O.Ms.No.257, which provides guidelines for consideration of government servants against whom disciplinary or court proceedings are pending for promotion. The court also referred to a previous decision that emphasized that denial of promotion requires the filing of a charge memo or charge-sheet in a competitive criminal court. The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's case for promotion in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.257, without referring to the pending FIR and criminal case against the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a medical officer, sought a writ to declare the respondents' action in not considering him for promotion as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner was suspended and faced a criminal case, but no charge-sheet was filed. The petitioner's juniors were promoted, and he sought consideration for promotion based on G.O.Ms.No.257.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's case for promotion should be considered in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.257, without reference to the pending criminal case. The court noted that the rejection of the petitioner's case was due to non-availability of vacancies, not his ineligibility.
Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's eligibility for promotion despite a pending criminal case and the non-consideration of his case based on G.O.Ms.No.257.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's case for promotion should be considered in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.257, and rejection was not due to his ineligibility. The court emphasized that the delay in completing the enquiry should not make the petitioner suffer for promotion.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's case for promotion in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.257, without referring to the pending FIR and criminal case against the petitioner. The writ petition and related miscellaneous petitions were disposed of.
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief :
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows :
The petitioner was appointed as Civil Assistant Surgeon (Medical Officer) on 16.11.1989 at Primary Health Centre, Wankidi, Adilabad District, by the 3rd respondent. Thereafter, he was transferred to the Civil Hospital, Chennur, Adilabad District and worked there up to 1995. Subsequently, he was transferred to Area Hospital, Manchiryal, Adilabad District, and worked there up to 2002. Thereafter, again he was transferred to the Community Health Centre, Bellampally, Adilabad District and worked there up to 2004. In 2004, he got a seat for P.G. Course and joined for M.D.Course at Kakatiya Medical College, Warangal and completed his M.D. course in the year 2007. After completion of his PG course, he joined duty at District Head Quarters Hospital, and he was promoted to the post of Deputy Civil Surgeon in the year 2007 and posted as Deputy DM & HO at ITDA, Eturnagaram, Warangal District and worked there up to 2009 and promoted as Municipal Health Officer, Warangal. He has served various places in Tribal and Rural areas of Adilabad and Warangal District, and he was promoted to Civil Surgeon (General Line) and posted as DM & HO, Karimnagar and reported to duty on 04.09.2013 and worked there up to 17.11.2014. Throughout his entire service, there was no complaint against him. While working as DM & HO, Karimnagar, a trap was laid in his office on 17.11.2014. The ACB authorities have recovered the bribe amount of Rs.60,000/- from the Senior Assistant in the office for doing official favour to the defacto-complainant for cancellation of his deputation. After the trap, the scientific method by using samples of phenolphthalein powder and sodium carbonate powder was conducted, and in the said test, he was not proven. However, he was falsely implicated in the ACB case, and even the ACB authorities did not take his version on the day of the trap. Subsequently, on 17.12.2014, the ACB authorities served a notice to him and the same was received by him and also submitted a detailed explanation to the ACB authorities on 24.12.2014. Not satisfied with the explanation, the petitioner was kept under suspension w.e.f. 17.11.2014 and continued under suspension upto 07.06.2017. Based on the FIR, a criminal case was also registered against the petitioner in Cr.No.35/ACB-KNR/2014 and produced him before the II Additional Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases at Hyderabad, and he got bail. The said case is pending adjudication before the Court below. Thereafter, his suspension was revoked, and he was reinstated into service and joined duty on 08.06.2017 and posted as Additional DM & HO, ITDA Utnoor, Adilabad District and working, as such, in the said place till date.
4. While the matter stood thus, the 3rd respondent intended to fill the vacant posts of Additional Directors from the category of Civil Surgeon (General Line)/Civil Surgeon Specialist under the administrative control of DPH & FW, Telangana State, Hyderabad, for the panel year 2017-18 vide proceedings Rc.No.3556/E1B/2018, dated 05.02.2018 duly enclosing the seniority list and provisional seniority list requesting to furnish the confidential reports for the last five years from 2012-13 to 2016-17
The central legal point established in the judgment is that government servants facing disciplinary or court proceedings for promotion should be considered in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.257, and delay....
Promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right when a criminal case is pending against an employee, despite the right to be considered for promotion.
Denial of promotion based on mere inquiry without formal charges is arbitrary and violates the right to be considered for promotion under Article 16(1).
The court emphasized the mandatory consideration of promotion cases for government servants, even with pending disciplinary proceedings, as per the Government Order dated 28.5.1997, and ruled that ad....
Denial of promotion based solely on pending criminal proceedings constitutes unjust punishment, especially when trials are unduly delayed.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for due process in deferring promotions in cases of pending disciplinary and criminal proceedings, emphasizing the need for char....
The right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right, and the order of punishment imposed against the petitioner did not comply with the requirements of G.O.Ms.No.342, dated 04.08.1997.
An employee has right for consideration for promotion, but has no right to ask promotion as a matter of course
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.