ORAL ORDER

(As per Hon’ble Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Judicial Member)

By this O.A., the applicant sought the following relief:

“……....to declare the respondents action in inclusion of the applicant name as provisional at Serial No.4 in the IFS Select List for the Panel Year vide F.No.17013/29/2020-IFS-II, Dt: 26^th December 2023 as illegal and arbitrary and clear violation of the Reg 5, 7 and 9 of IFS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulation ‘1996 and violation of the applicants fundamental right guaranteed under article 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and Consequently Direct the respondents 1 to 4 herein to consider the applicant for promotion under the IFS (Appointment by promotion) Regulation’s 1966 against the number of substantive vacancies as on the first day of January of the panel year’ 2013 for which the Selection committee Meeting held on 30.8.2023 with all the consequential benefits and pass such other and further order or orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. Learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the order of MOEF for promotion to IFS dated 26.12.2023 wherein the UPSC approved the select list for the panel years 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019. In the select lists for the years from 2013 to 2018, applicant’s name is shown.

3. By order dated 05.01.2018, the disciplinary action was initiated against the applicant leveling four articles of charge as he has failed to supervise the in execution of work. Therefore, though the respondents have taken up selected list for the panel years 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, & 2018, the applicant’s name has been included in the select list with a condition that subject to clearance in disciplinary proceedings pending against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the guidelines have been issued by the UPSC in respect of IFS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulation, 1966 wherein as per the rules for preparation of suitable Officers specific guidelines have been given as to how to prepare the panel against the vacancy year. The panel has to be prepared every year and committee has to consider the case for promotion. The learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance of the judgments in respect of the preparation of list for suitable Officer.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that without following said rules, now for the 1^st time after 10 years they are preparing the panel from 2013 onwards and taking undue advantage of the said charge sheet, issued in the year 2018. As such, followed with the K.V. Janaki Raman case, the same is not permissible under the law.

5. Smt. B. Gayatri Varma, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Government and Sri Panduranga Reddy, Standing Counsel for A.P. Government appearing on behalf of the respondents, vehemently opposed relief on the ground that applicant failed to supervise the execution of work, and the applicant lacks integrity, discipline and devotion towards the duty un- becoming of Government Servant. Thereby, he has contravened Rule -3 of the A.P.C.S. (Conduct) Rules, 1964, and therefore, the articles of charge have been issued. Therefore, the committee will consider the applicant’s eligibility followed with the said disciplinary action.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has superannuated in the year 2019. Now, for the first time select list has been prepared for the panel years, as mentioned above, in December, 2023.

7. It is to be noted that in their selected committee, in its meeting dated 30.08.2023 recommended the names as per the select list and an order has been released on 26.12.2023. However, against the applicant’s name, they have put ‘*’(star)

and indicated that applicant’s name has been included in the list provisionally subject to clearance in the disciplinary proceedings pending against him. It is to be noted that, the disciplinary proceeding which has been initiated in the