P. Mandal, J. - (1.) This writ application is for a direction in the nature of mandamus and /or in the nature of certiorari and/or in the nature of revision and/ or in other appropriate writ or orders, direction/ directions and also for setting aside different orders passed against the petitioner and to grant him promotion to with effect from 2002.
(2.) The petitioner was initially appointed Salesman in the year 1970 and he was subsequently promoted to the post of Inspector, Consumer Cooperative Stores Ltd, Port Blair. A disciplinary proceeding was started against him and he was found guilty. Subsequently, he was directed to make a deposit of a sum of Rs. 2,39,040/ -(Rupees two lakhs thirty nine thousand and forty only) to the said Cooperative Society. The petitioner preferred an appeal. His appeal was dismissed. Then he filed a writ petition bearing W.P. No. 004 of 2006 under Article of the Constitution of India and this Hon'ble Court Circuit Bench directed that during the pendency of the disciplinary proceeding, his promotion should be kept in a sealed cover and after the disciplinary proceeding was over, his promotion should be considered in accordance with law. The disciplinary proceeding started against the petitioner was ultimately set aside by this Hon'ble Court and the disciplinary authority was directed to hold a disciplinary proceeding afresh. Ultimately, the petitioner was exonerated from the said proceeding. In the meantime, one Mr. R. Madhavan, a junior to the petitioner in service promoted to the post of Deputy Manager. Since Mr. Madhavan was junior to him in service, after the disposal of the disciplinary proceeding acquitting him of the charge leveled against him, he prayed for restoration of his position just before the name of Mr. R. Madhavan, his junior. He has prayed for such relief because in the meantime, he had retired from service on superannuation on April 30, 2008.
(3.) The respondent authorities and respondent nos. 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 are contesting the writ application separately contending inter -alia that the disciplinary proceeding was started against him in the matter of irregularities in the supply of empty drums. He was found guilty and directed to pay the said amount. The petitioner preferred an appeal and the appellate authority confirmed the order of the disciplinary authority. However, the Hon'ble Circuit Bench set aside the impugned order directing a fresh enquiry. Accordingly, a fresh enquiry was started and it was concluded on February 25, 2008 exonerating the petitioner of the charges. His promotion was held up under the above circumstances and his promotion matter was cleared on March 26, 2008. His allegation that Mr. R. Madhavan was promoted to the post of Deputy Manager with effect from October 11, 2002 was untrue. Mr. R. Madhavan was in fact never worked as Deputy Manager. The claim of the petitioner is malafide and so the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.;