SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 15093

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Raghuveer Shrivastava – Appellant
Versus
M/o Personnel public Grievances And Pensions – Respondent
O.A./136/2016



CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH JABALPUR Original Application No.200/00136/2016 Jabalpur, this Tuesday, the 9th day of December, 2025 HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE SMT MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Raghuveer Shrivastava S/o Shri D. D. Shrivastava, Secretary Jail Govt. of MP, aged about 60 years, R/o 17 Rishi Nagar, Char Imli, Bhopal (M.P.)

Pin Code 462016 -Applicant (By Advocate – Shri Sanjay K Agrawal, Sr. Advocate, along with Shri A H Khan)

V e r s u s (1) The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training, Govt. of India, New Delhi. Pin - 110001.

(2) The Chief Secretary, to Govt. of Madhya Pradesh, Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan (M.P.) 462004.

(3) The State of Madhya Pradesh, through the Secretary, Department of General Administration, Govt. M.P., Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan (M.P.)

462004.

(4) Shri Ravendra Kumar Pastaur, S/o not known to the applicant, Commissioner Ujjain Division Ujjain (M.P.) 456001.

(5) Smt. Seema Sharma, Principal Secretary of Home Department, Govt.

of M.P. Vallabh Bhawan Bhopal (M.P.) 462004.

(6) Arun Kumar Pandey, Principal Secretary, Govt. of M.P., 26-Kisan Bhavan Mandi Board, Bhopal (M.P.).

(7) V.K.Batham, Principal Secretary, Department of Legislative Affairs, Govt. of M.P., Vindhyanchal Bhawan Bhopal (M.P.) 462004.

- Respondents (By Advocate – Shri S P Singh, Shri Divesh Jain)

O R D E R By Mallika Arya, AM:

Through this Original Application, the applicant is seeking directions to the respondents to consider his claim for promotion to the post of Principal Secretary by ignoring the uncommunicated Confidential Report for the period 2012-13 and if found fit for promotion and to give him all consequential benefits from the date his juniors have been promoted. He has also prayed that the impugned order dated 29.12.2015 be quashed and set aside.

2. Briefly stating, the facts of the case are that the applicant was initially appointed to the State Administrative Service. He was subsequently appointed by promotion to the Indian Administrative Service and was allotted 1992 batch. The position of the applicant appears at Sl. No. 107 in the list of members of all India Administrative Service, as on 01.10.2013 (Annexure A/1). The Respondents No. 4 to 7 are junior to the applicant and their name appears at serial no. 109 to 112 respectively. The applicant submits that he had completed the requisite years of service (25) for promotion to the first above super time scale i.e. Principal Secretary to the State of M.P.. The applicant was never punished for any act of misconduct nor was any adverse entry in his confidential report communicated to him. On 18.12.2015, a meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee was convened for considering the eligible cases for promotion to the IAS i.e. to the first above super time scale i.e. Principal Secretary to the Govt. of M.P. The Departmental Promotion Committee comprised of Chief Secretary and two senior most Additional Chief Secretaries to the Govt. of M.P. On the recommendations of the DPC, an order was issued on 29.12.2015 (Annexure A/3) wherein as many as 11 officers of 1992 batch have been promoted to the post of Principal Secretary. In the said order, the name of the applicant did not find mention and the persons junior to him i.e. respondents 3 to 6 were promoted to the post of Principal Secretary. Applicant submitted a representation to the Chief Secretary, Govt. of M.P. on learning about this. He informed that since no adverse entry in his confidential report had been communicated to him and therefore he cannot be denied promotion on the basis of uncommunicated Annual Performance Appraisal Reports. He also mentioned that the Performance Appraisal Report for the year 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 had not been sent to him till date. On 22.12.2015 (Annexure A/5), he again submitted a representation to the Chief Secretary wherein he mentioned t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top