The root cause of the litigation was an order dated 08.11.2007 vide which the respondent No.1 was reverted from the post of senior lecturer to that of lecturer. A meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) was held on 15.03.2007 wherein the respondent No.1 was recommended to be given promotion. However, there is no dispute that when the candidates were considered for promotion and the DPC held on 15.03.2007, the respondent No.1 was having the requisite benchmark and was recommended to be promoted. With reference to the aforesaid fact, what is available on record is that on a representation made by the respondent No.1 to the then Deputy Chief Minister, he directed that the DPC be held after receipt of the ACR for the immediately preceding year.
When the vacancy arose on 31.05.2006, the respondent No.1 requested that the ACR for the year 2005- 06 should also be part of the record before the DPC when the matter regarding promotion is considered. Oka]……………………………J.
Case Title: MANOJ KUNAR JINDAL Vs. RAJNI MAHAJAN (2023 INSC 226)
Case Number: C.A. No.-008110-008110 / 2011
