- (1.) This is an appeal against order 10.7.1991 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.P. No. 3404 of 1990 vide which he directed the appellant to review the confidential reports of the respondent in accordance with the averments made in C.W.P. No. 10222 of 1988 and then consider him for promotion on every such occasion when persons junior to him were considered and grant him promotion w.e.f. the date he is found suitable.
(2.) Respondent-Krishan Gopal Puri was commissioned in the Indian Army on 30.6.1963. He was promoted as Lieutenant w.e.f. 30.6.1965, as Captain w.e.f. 30.6.1966 and as Major w.e.f. 30.6.1971. Vide letter dated 13.5.1983 (Annexure PS with the writ petition), he was informed that his case for promotion to the rank of Lt. Colonel had been considered by the appropriate Selection Board but he had not been placed in the acceptable grade for such promotion and, therefore, he was no longer eligible for further consideration for promotion. The statutory complaint filed by him was rejected by the Central Government vide order dated 10.4.1987 (Annexure P6 in the writ petition).
(3.) The respondent challenged communication dated 13.5.1983 and order dated 10.4.1987 in C.W.P. No. 10222 of 1988 which was disposed of by the Division Bench on 3.5.1989. The relevant extract of the order passed by the Division Bench is reproduced below :- "Nobody appears for the respondents. However, before lunch, Mr. P.S. Saini, Advocate, appeared for Mr. Chahar and requested for more time to file the written statement. But we were not agreeable to adjourn the case because we found that inspite of repeated adjournments granted since November, 1988, no written statement has been filed by the respondents, and the very purpose of issuing the notice of motion stands frustrated. Thereupon, Mr. Saini promised to send Mr. Chahar, the learned counsel who had been appearing for the respondents on the earlier dates, for putting in appearance after lunch. It is already 2.30 P.M. Mr. Chahar is not available. In the circumstances, we see no justification in adjourning the case for the filing of the written statement. The mater is fully covered by 0.8, Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure, read with rule 32 of the Writ (Jurisdiction) Rules and, therefore, we strike off the defence of the respondents. As a necessary consequence, the averments made in this petition are taken to be correct for the purpose of this order. Relying on the same, we allow this petition and direct the respondents to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for promotion in accordance with law. It is further directed that this process of consideration should be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The petitioner is also held entitled to the costs of this limitation (litigation ?) which we determine at Rs. 500/-. This petition stands disposed of as indicated above. In compliance of the direction given by the Court, the respondent's case was again considered by the Selection Board held on 25.7.1989, but he was not found in the acceptable category. This was conveyed to him vide letter dated 1.8.1989 (Annexure P8 in the writ petition).;