Chit Bahal Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
service-promotion-denial of time bound promotion-petitioner had not cleared accounts examination-petitioner did not fall within consideration zone for being granted selection grade/senior selection grade-he did not fulfill requisite criteria of seniority as well as clean character roll which is precondition for promotion from junior selection grade to senior selection grade to super selection grade-such delinquent officers who were wrongly promoted cannot be granted second time bound promotion unless first time bound promotion is confirmed-petition dismissed. - constitution of india article 215: [m. karpaga vinayagam, cjm, .y.eqbal & amareshwar sahay, r.k. merathia, narendra nath tiwari, jj] contempt proceedings review powers of high court held, article 215 of the constitution vests the high court with all the powers of court of record including the power to punish for its contempt. this special jurisdiction is inherent in a court of record from the very nature of the court itself. the said special power is not subject to the procedural law either of the criminal procedure code or the contempt of courts act. the high court can deal with the matter summarily and can adopt its own procedure. however, if the high court initiates the proceeding as a court of record, principle of natural justice must be applied and the contemner should be given sufficient opportunity to know the accusation and to defend himself. in the instant case, the contemner was served with the notice to show cause. he was well aware of the accusation. he also admitted his guilt. in view thereof, contention of the contemner lawyer that he was not heard on merit of the contempt application and the impugned judgment of punishing petitioner in contempt of court is violative of principles of natural justice, is not tenable. article 215: contempt proceedings review of conviction held, it is the solemn duty of the bench and bar to maintain and uphold the majesty, authority and dignity of the courts for the sustenance and progress of democracy in our country particularly at the juncture when there are number of instances of outside attempt to disintegrate and destroy the democratic set up of our country. such conduct of a member of the bar brings the authority of the court and the administration of justice into disrespect, erodes and undermine the foundation of the judiciary by shaking faith and confidence of the people in the ability of the courts to deliver free and fair justice, it is a deliberate attempt to insult the high court and denigrate the authority and solemnity and court strongly deprecate such attempt made with biased attitude. such indiscriminate allegations against judges, who are the members of the bench, cannot be a ground for review of the impugned judgment. punishment of prohibiting appearance of contemner/lawyer before high court as well as courts under its jurisdiction is based on his repeated convictions for contempt in the past is not violative of article 19(g) of the constitution. no interference in exercise of review jurisdiction is warranted. - it is further clear that he did not fulfill the requisites criteria of seniority as well as clean character roll which is the pre-condition for promotion from junior selection grade to senior selection grade to super selection grade limited to 2.5% of the total cadre or strength and even otherwise he did possess the requisite qualification. 6. considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, i find that the impugned order clearly assigns the reason that the petitioner along with six others was found to be unqualified on the relevant date since they have not cleared the accounts examination. even the circular which is annexed at annexure 6 clearly specifies that such delinquent officers who were wrongly promoted cannot be granted the second time bound promotion unless the first time bound promotion is confirmed.ajit kumar sinha, j.1. in the instant writ petition the petitioner prays for following reliefs: a. the rejection order dated 21.09.2002 passed by the respondent no. 1 be quashed.b. the office order dated 15.01.2003 so far the petitioner is concerned, whereby and whereunder his first time bound promotion has been cancelled be quashed.c. the respondents be directed not to give effect to the office order dated 21.9.2002 and 15.01.2003 and to consider his further promotion in accordance to the office notification dated 18.12.1989.d. the respondents be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for his promotion against the super selection grade and senior selection grade on and from the date it is due against the vacant sanction posts and to give all consequential benefits thereon.2. the facts, in brief, are set out as under: the petitioner was initially appointed as survey store clerk as a grade-iii employee on 14.2.1963. he was given time bound promotion vide an order dated 17.10.1990 with effect from 01.4.1983 and thereafter he was not given any promotion i.e. either the second time bound promotion or the senior selection grade though he was entitled for the same with effect from 1988. 3. the main contention raised by the petitioner is that the rejection order dated 21.9.2002 has been passed on extraneous circumstances without considering the letter dated 28.01.1983 and 15.01.2003 issued by the establishment deputy collector, dhanbad. it has further been contended that the stay order is arbitrary, illegal and discriminatory. according to the counsel for the petitioner he had passed hindi noting and drafting examination in the year 1983 and thus the cancellation of the first time bound promotion for non-passing of the examination in question was illegal.4. the counsel for the respondents submit that the petitioner was neither eligible nor found suitable for promotion as per selection grade/senior selection grade in view of the non-fulfillment of the criteria of seniority and also in view of his character roll which was essential for promotion. it has also been contended that his confidential report was adverse continuously for seven years and he did not pass hindi noting and drafting examination and he was suspended twice earlier and his conduct was not conducive and he was also censured and reprimanded on many occasion for dereliction and negligence of duty coupled with act of indiscipline. it has also been submitted that the second time bound promotion is not automatic on mere completion of 25 years of service but instead the condition stipulated by government order no. 308 dated 2.2.1994 the second time bound promotion cannot be granted until the confirmation/approval of the first time bound promotion is accorded by the state government and thus it cannot be claimed as a matter of right.5. i have considered the arguments and the rival submissions. it appears that the petitioner was found guilty of dereliction and negligence in performing his duty and was censured and reprimanded on many occasion. he was also put under suspension and his confidential report was not at all satisfactory. it also appears that the first time bound promotion was given with effect from 01.4.1983 vide order dated 17.10.1990 provisionally and the same was with a pre-condition that it will be subject to the approval of the competent authority, however, the state government through the department of science and technology rejected the same on the ground that he had not cleared the accounts examination and as such his first time bound promotion was untenable and it was in this background he was not considered for the second time bound promotion. the fact remains that the petitioner did not fall within the consideration zone for being granted selection grade/senior selection grade. it is further clear that he did not fulfill the requisites criteria of seniority as well as clean character roll which is the pre-condition for promotion from junior selection grade to senior selection grade to super selection grade limited to 2.5% of the total cadre or strength and even otherwise he did possess the requisite qualification.6. considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, i find that the impugned order clearly assigns the reason that the petitioner along with six others was found to be unqualified on the relevant date since they have not cleared the accounts examination. even the circular which is annexed at annexure 6 clearly specifies that such delinquent officers who were wrongly promoted cannot be granted the second time bound promotion unless the first time bound promotion is confirmed.considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case this writ petition being devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed.