MADHUKAR JAYARAM DESHMUKH Vs. THE CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF MAHARASHTRA LTD. AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr. Rajendra Sawant, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Mr. Pai, learned counsel for respondent no.2 waive service of the rule. By consent, rule heard forthwith. Heard both sides.

(2.) The petitioner joined the services of respondent no.1 as a Field Officer (Accounts) with effect from 29th March, 1973. The petitioner was promoted as Assistant*, Accounts Officer. In or about 1980, respondent no.1 advertised the post of Accounts Officer. The petitioner and respondent no.2 were among the candidates called for the interview. The petitioner was selected to the post and appointed as Accounts Officer with effect from 11th Sept., 1980 by order dated 9th Sept., 1980. The petitioner was confirmed in the said post of Accounts Officer with effect from 11th Sept., 1981 by order dated 24th Sept., 1981. Respondent No.2 was promoted to the post of Accounts Officer in April 1983. As such, respondent no.2 was junior to the petitioner both in the post of Assistant Accounts Officer as also in the post of Accounts Officer. The next promotional post from the post of Accounts Officer is the post of Senior Accounts Officer.

(3.) The petitioner has averred in the petition that while he was on leave on account of sick-ness, he came to know that respondent no.2 had been promoted as Senior Accounts Officer by order dated 17th Jan., 1991 and he took charge of the said post with effect from 18th Jan., 1991. The petitioner has averred in the petition that he had a clean record of service and no adverse remarks from the confidential report were communicated to him at any time. In fact, he had held the charge of the post of Senior Accounts Officer for a period of about nine months on earlier occasion. The petitioner, therefore, contended that the appointment of respondent no.2 to the post of Senior Accounts Officer superseding his claim is arbitrary and mala fide.