Retired employees cannot claim promotion after cessation of service if eligibility is determined by the date of the DPC meeting.

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985 seeking the following reliefs: -

I) Quashing the Forest Order No. 08 of 2020 dated 9-1-2020 and Forest Order No. 09 of 2020 dated 10-1-2020, both issued by respondent No. 3 in so far as and to the extent the juniors of the petitioners have been promoted as Foresters in the pay scale of Rs. (29200-92300), level-5 with effect from 20-12-2019 i.e. the date from which the DPC had cleared their names for promotion.

II) Directing respondents to promote the petitioners as Foresters in the pay scale of Rs. (29200-92300), level-5 with effect from their due dates of promotion, with all consequential benefits.

III) Such other additional or alternate relief which this Hon'ble Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case deem fit and proper be also passed in favour of the applicants and against the respondents.

2. The applicants have approached this Tribunal by filing the present Original Application seeking quashment of Forest Order No. 08 of 2020 dated 09.01.2020 and Forest Order No. 09 of 2020 dated 10.01.2020, to the extent their juniors were promoted to the post of Forester with effect from 20.12.2019, and for a consequential direction to promote the applicants to the said post from their alleged due dates with all consequential benefits.

3. The applicants were initially appointed in Class-IV posts in the Forest Department during the early 1980s and were subsequently promoted as Forest Guards and thereafter as Deputy Foresters in the years 2013. They claim that under the Forest (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules, 1991, 60% of the posts of Forester are to be filled by promotion from Class-VIII posts, namely Deputy Foresters, and since they were matriculates and holding the feeder post, they were eligible for promotion to the post of Forester.

4. It is the specific case of the applicants that although seniority lists of Deputy Foresters were issued and the department initiated the process for promotion by seeking vigilance clearance and service particulars, the Department failed to convene the DPC in time. According to the applicants, this delay was entirely attributable to the respondents and not to any fault on their part. They contend that had the DPC been convened in time, they would have been promoted before their retirement, and therefore denial of promotion on the ground of retirement is illegal and discriminatory, particularly when juniors have been promoted vide the impugned orders.

5. It is not in dispute that applicant No.1 retired on 30.11.2018, applicant No.2 on 31.05.2019, applicant No.3 on 30.09.2019 and applicant No.4 on 31.07.2018, whereas the Divisional Level Departmental Promotion Committee met on 20.12.2019 and the promotions were ordered thereafter.

6. The respondents have contested the application and raised preliminary objections regarding maintainability, absence of cause of action and suppression of material facts. It is specifically pleaded that the impugned promotion orders were issued strictly on the basis of the recommendations of the Divisional Level DPC held on 20.12.2019 and only those Deputy Foresters who were in service on the said date and were otherwise eligible were considered.

7. It is asserted that the applicants had already superannuated prior to the convening of the DPC and, therefore, were not eligible for consideration. The respondents have also clarified that the final seniority list of Deputy Foresters was issued on 31.08.2016 and not in the year 2015 as al