RANCHI, India, Jan. 6 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Dec. 5:

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The instant Intra-Court Appeal is preferred for quashing the order dated 09.01.2018 passed by the Writ Court in W.P. (S) No. 2257 of 2016; whereby the prayer of the Petitioner for issuing a mandamus upon the Respondents for consideration of his case for promotion to the post of Shirestadar in the Office of District and Sessions Judge, Chaibasa has been dismissed and the reasoned order passed by the concerned Respondent was sustained. For brevity, relevant paragraph of the impugned order is extracted hereinbelow:

"Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the opinion that no case is made out for interference in the impugned order. There is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. The respondents after due consideration have passed a reasoned order. This Court is of the view that no consideration can be given to a person who is found guilty of gross misconduct and has been found guilty of insubordination, Indiscipline and dereliction of duty. He has been in habit of forging certificates. Any person who is found guilty of aforesaid charges cannot be considered as he has rightly not been considered for promotion. No interference is required in the writ petition."

3. Briefly stated, the Petitioner was initially appointed as clerk in the Registry of the 1st Respondent and he joined the said post on 21.05.1974. The grievance of the Petitioner before the Writ Court was that he was the senior most assistant in the establishment of Civil Court at Chaibasa from where he superannuated on 31.01.2016; and the reasoned order is bad in law and on fact, inasmuch as, he was duly entitled for promotion to the post of Shirestadar.

4. From the impugned order, it appears that the Petitioner had earlier moved before this Court in W.P. (S) No. 296 of 2016 which was disposed of vide order dated 22.01.2016 by giving liberty to the Petitioner to file a representation before the competent authority for consideration of his case for promotion to the post of Shirestadar and accordingly, as per the order passed by this Court, the Petitioner preferred a representation before the concerned Respondent on 27.01.2016 and the representation was considered and his claim for promotion to the post of Shirestadar in the office of District and Sessions Judge, Chaibasa has been rejected.

5. The case of the Petitioner-Appellant before the Writ Court was that though he was duly competent for consideration for the post of Shirestadar, but he was not considered. He came to know about the allegations against him that he was found guilty of gross misconduct but the same was never communicated to him and from the impugned order only, he came to know about the same; as such, his case for promotion should have been considered.

6. The case of the Respondents before the Writ Court was that the writ-petitioner was found guilty of gross misconduct and he has been held guilty in two departmental proceedings for gross misconduct and was also suspended vide D.J. Order No. 81 of 2004 dated 26.07.2004. As a matter of fact, the further case of the Respondents before the Writ Court was that the writ-petitioner was also involved in verifying false affidavit while performing duty as Court Shirestadar to the District Judge in Civil Revision No. 24 of 2004 and further, he was having several remarks like insubordination, indiscipline, dereliction of duty, gross negligence, etc.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=rC8SUFuyEFsvB5V61cXUrIoOCFUcs98grbSHcEMU%2BZPzWxh4TBotGCLK8I95Y2Wa&caseno=LPA/135/2018&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010088762018&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.