Promotion eligibility is determined by age limits and prior penalties; repeated claims on the same issue are barred by res judicata.

ORDER

By Mallika Arya, AM:

This Original Application has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the action of the respondents wherein his claim for grant of promotion to the post of Inspector has been rejected.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant while working in the respondent department was promoted as UDC on 27.02.1987. Thereafter, he passed the written test required for promotion to the post of Inspector on 09.11.1994. The DPC for the year 1996-1997 for promotion of upper division clerks to the post of Inspectors, met on 18.12.96 and the name of the applicant was not considered since there was a penalty imposed against him. The applicant represented against the same. On 01.09.1998, an order (Annexure A/4) was issued by the Respondent no.1, directing the Respondent No. 3, to consider the case of applicant for promotion along with others in Review DPC on the basis of merits of the case. On 16.10.1998 Review DPC was conducted and the applicant was called for the interview along with others. On 08.03.1999 (Annexure A/6) the applicant wrote a letter to Respondent no. 3 requesting for age relaxation as granted to other officials for consideration by DPC. In the said letter, he stated that although he had attained the age of 45 years as on 18.03.1997, a similar relaxation was given by DPC for year 1995-96 and 1996-97. Vide Ministry's order F. No. A 32011/44/2004-AD III A, dated 16.12.2004 (Annexure A/15) the age limit of 45/47 years, was relaxed upto 50 years for the promotion to the grade of Inspector. It was intimated to the applicant vide letter dated 11.04.2007 (Annexure A/13) that on account of reaching the 50 years of age as on 18.03.2002 he was not considered. It was further intimated that the crucial date for consideration by the DPC for the year 2002- 2003 was 01.01.2002. It was further informed that one vacancy of the Inspector was lying which was filled up by review D.P.C. of 2006- 2007. On request, the respondents supplied him a copy of the order dated 16.12.2004 (Annexure A/15) which was meant for Excise Department whereas the applicant is working in Narcotics Department. Being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents, applicant represented before the Respondent No.2. Thereafter, the applicant approached this Tribunal by way of OA. No. 478/2007 wherein this Tribunal vide order dated 10.05.2007 (Annexure A/16) directed the respondents to decide the representation of the applicant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of the said order. While deciding the said representation, respondents passed an order rejecting the claim of the applicant holding that the crucial date for determining the eligibility was 01.10.97 for the year 1997-98, 01.10.95 for the year 1995-96, 01.10.1996 for the year 1996-97, 01.10.98 for the year 1998- 99 and 01.01.2002 for the year 2002-2003 respectively. A copy of the order dated 20.12.2007 passed by the respondents in compliance of the order passed in O.A. No.478/2007 is enclosed as (Annexure A-17). Thereafter applicant filed an appeal against said order before the Respondent No.1 on 15.01.2008. Since no orders were passed against the said appeal till 26.02.2008, he gave a reminder to respondent no. 1 and met Respondent no. 2 in person. The applicant furnished various certificates along with judgments on which he had relied and also office memorandums issued by the Govt. of India, with regard to the procedure to be observed by the Departmental Promotion Committees. A Copy of representation dated 15.01.2008 and 26.02.2008 is enclosed as Annexure A-18. Meanwhile the respondents issued a minor penalty charge sheet against the applicant. Later on the charge sheet for minor penalty was dropped and a major penalty charge sheet was issued. Within a period of one month the whole enquiry was completed and he was dismissed from service. His appeal against the same has also been dismissed. Since the representation/appeal dated 26.02.2008 and 15.01.2008