The Union Of INDIA vs. Shri N.Jeetendra

Held

The High Court, considering the rival submissions, directed the petitioners to conduct the DPC in line with the CAT's order in O.A.No.753 of 2021 within a reasonable period of four months from the date of receiving a copy of the High Court's order. Crucially, the Court held that the DPC proceedings and any exercise undertaken by the petitioners would be subject to the outcome of O.A.No.1714 of 2020 pending before the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi. The Court also clarified that if any action was to be taken regarding the reversion of respondents, the petitioners must follow due procedure, provide an opportunity to the respondents, and then pass appropriate orders. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided, but the ultimate promotion would depend on the outcome of the pending CAT case.

Facts

The petitioners, working as Executive Assistants in the Goods and Service Tax Department, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 25.02.2022 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Hyderabad Bench. The CAT had directed the petitioners to conduct a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) meeting for promotion to the post of Inspector within three months. The petitioners argued that they could not conduct the DPC due to a stay order granted by the CAT in another case (O.A.No.659 of 2019, later transferred to the Principal Bench, New Delhi) concerning reversion orders of some Tax Assistants promoted after the respondents. They also cited two Board Circulars requiring compliance with an Apex Court order in B.S. Murthy vs. A. Ravinder Singh & Union of India before conducting DPCs. The respondents contended that over nine months had passed since the CAT's order without any action.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners can be directed to conduct a DPC for promotion to the post of Inspector, considering the pendency of another case (O.A.No.1714 of 2020) before the Principal Bench of the CAT, New Delhi, which involves a stay on reversion orders affecting potential candidates for promotion? 2. Whether the petitioners can be granted an extension of time to conduct the DPC, and if so, whether the DPC proceedings should be made subject to the outcome of the pending case before the Principal Bench of the CAT, New Delhi, and compliance with relevant Board Circulars? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners argued that the stay order in O.A.No.659 of 2019 (now O.A.No.1714 of 2020) prevented them from conducting the DPC. They also contended that compliance with Board Circulars dated 01.06.2022 and 06.09.2022, in light of the Apex Court's order in B.S. Murthy vs. A. Ravinder Singh & Union of India, was a prerequisite for conducting the DPC. They sought more time and for the DPC to be subject to the outcome of the pending case. Respondent's arguments: The respondents argued that nine months had already elapsed since the CAT's order, and no action had been taken by the petitioners. They prayed for reasonable time to be granted to the petitioners to conduct the DPC.