LESLEY JACOB Vs. INDIAN COUNCIL FOR CULTURAL RELATIONS ICCR NEW DELHI
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
INDIAN COUNCIL FOR CULTURAL RELATIONS (ICCR), NEW DELHI
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Heard Ms. S. Sethna Baria, Advocate instructing Mr. C. V. Mohan Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajiv Reddy, Advocate instructing Mr. K. Subrahmanya Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, for the 1st respondent. None appears for Respondent Nos.2 to 9.
(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by having been superseded to the post of Programme Officer in the 1st respondent establishment and seeks invalidation of the order dated 14-2-2000 whereby the Respondent Nos.2 to 9, her juniors, were promoted as Programme Officers ignoring her case for such promotion. That the 1st respondent is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India is not in disputation; that Respondent Nos.2 to 9 are juniors to the petitioner in the category of Assistant Programme Officers or equivalent categories is also not in dispute; that the petitioner and Respondent Nos.2 to 9 are qualified for consideration for promotion to the post of Programme Officers is also not in dispute. While the petitioner claims to have been superseded contrary to the legal architecture governing promotions to the post of Programme Officer, the 1 st respondent seeks to justify the petitioner's supersession on the ground that 'merit' has primacy in the matter of promotion to the category of Programme Officer and the petitioner was not found comparatively meritorious to the Respondent Nos.2 to 9 by the Departmental Promotions Committee (for short 'DPC').
(3.) In Paragraph Nos.5 to 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has set out facts in support of her claim to an outstanding record of service and would invite this Court to consider whether in view of her asserted record of service, she ought to have been considered preferentially vis-a- vis the Respondent Nos.2 to 9 for promotion to the post of Programme Officer. As this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India does not sit in appeal over the selection process, this invitation of the petitioner ought to be and is accordingly declined.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.