S.B. Sinha, J. - (1.) This writ application is directed against an order dated 24.11.98 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in T.A. No.1186 of 1986, whereby and whereunder the writ application filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed.
(2.) The fact of the matter as emerges from the decision of the learned Tribunal is that the respondent No.6 herein was appointed as Scheduled 'B' Stenographer. He was sent on deputation to Food Corporation of India. Despite the fact that his lien was with the State and he became entitled to promotion and although the same had been given to him, it was not carried into effect. The respondent No.6 and others filed two writ applications before this Court which were marked as C.R. Nos. 5715(W) and 5716(W) of 1984. By a judgment and order dated 23.3.89, Sengupta, J. held that the condition of representation attached to the order of promotion being arbitrary and as such discriminatory and unreasonable and was thus liable to be set aside. It was noticed that the petitioners were promoted to the Higher promotional posts but the benefits of the promotion were withheld for non- fulfilment of the purported condition of repatriation. Upon taking into consideration the contentions of the parties, it was directed, "In the result, these applications succeed. The Rule is made absolute. Let appropriate writs be issued. The respondents are directed to allow the petitioners to avail of the promotions to higher posts from the date mentioned in the respective orders of promotion." Pursuant to or in furtherance of the said order, the respondent No.6 was promoted with effect from 5.5.81.
(3.) Before the learned Tribunal, a contention was only raised that the order dated 3.3.94 which was annexed .as annexure "G" to the petition and order dated 7.9.94 which was an office note and marked as annexure 'H' to the petition were illegal. The only ground raised before the learned Tribunal was that the benefit of promotion granted to the respondent No.6 and other employees with effect from 5.5.81 was violative of the rules framed on 22nd August, 1994 in terms of proviso appended to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The learned Tribunal, 'inter alia', held that the rules framed by the State having no application in the instant case inasmuch as the said rules came into force subsequent to the date of promotion granted to the respondent No.6 and it was further held that in any event as the promotion had been granted in terms of the order passed by this High Court, the same cannot be said to be illegal. As regards note-sheet which was contained in annexure 'H', the learned Tribunal arrived at a decision that the said note sheet is not fructified into order affecting the rights to the parties.;