- (1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges order dated 6.7.2006 (P-1) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity, 'the Tribunal'), rejecting the claim of the original applicant-petitioner for promotion to the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) against the vacancy for the year 2001. A further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to promote the petitioner to IAS on the basis of notification dated 26.2.2002 (A-2) by dropping the condition incorporated against his name for the vacancy pertaining to the year 2001.
(2.) Brief facts of the case may first be noticed. The petitioner was an officer belonging to the Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch). On 18.10.1999 he was placed under suspension and thereafter on 22.10.1999 he was served with a charge sheet. The regular departmental proceedings were initiated against him, which according to the petitioner concluded on 9.7.2001. On 28.12.2001, the meeting of the Select Committee for appointment to IAS was held and the name of the petitioner was placed in the Select List at Sr. No. 1 provisionally subject to clearance of his name in the disciplinary proceedings pending against him and grant of integrity certificate by the State Government. In that regard a notification dated 26.2.2002 was issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and training (A-2). The said notification was conveyed to the petitioner vide letter dated 14.3.2002 and immediately thereafter he made a representation dated 19.3.2002 requesting the State Government to recommend his name by removing the aforesaid condition.
(3.) When nothing was heard, the petitioner approached this Court by way of CWP No. 6216 of 2002 seeking a direction to the State Government to recommend his name un-conditionally. On 28.3.2003, after considering the issue of jurisdiction the said writ petition was disposed of with the observation that the petitioner may pursue his cause before the Tribunal. Accordingly, the petitioner filed O.A. No. 279-HR-2003 before the Tribunal. On 4.7.2003, the Tribunal dismissed the said OA by holding that the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner were still pending and no direction could be issued to the State Government to drop the aforesaid condition. The Tribunal further found that the select panel in which the petitioner's name was placed at Sr. No. 1 remained valid only till 18.4.2002 i.e. 60 days after it received the approval of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). The Tribunal also opined that since the candidature of the petitioner was subjected to condition, the same could not be made unconditional and that the panel has expired well before filing of the O.A. (R-4/1). The concluding para of the order dated 4.7.2003 (R-4/1) passed by the Tribunal reads thus: "From the aforesaid discussion, we are of the view that the select panel in which the applicant's name was placed at Sr. No. 1 remained valid only till 18.4.02 i.e. 60 days after it received the approval of the UPSC and since the candidature of the applicant was rightfully conditional, the same cannot be made unconditional. That panel has expired well before the filing of this OA. The action of the State Govt. in denying integrity certificate to the applicant due to pendency of departmental as well as criminal proceedings against the applicant was fully justified. "In view of above, the OA is held to be without any merit and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.";