STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. Vs. GAURISHANKAR TIWARY
LAWS(JHAR)-2003-12-76
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on December 15,2003

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. Appellant
VERSUS
Gaurishankar Tiwary Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) GAURISHANKAR Tiwary, the respondent No. 1 was appointed in December, 1972 and was posted in Quality Control Department of the Bokaro Steel Plant. In June. 1977 he was promoted to the next higher scale and with effect from 16.12.1980 was given P -7 scale. In May, 1982 he claimed to have acquired a professional qualification of Associate Member of the Institute of Chemist (India). In the year 1984 he as transferred to Refractory Raw Material Plant and on 24.3.1988 was promoted to P -8 scale.
(2.) UNDER the circular dated 27.12.1982/4.1.1983 the respondent No. 1 was qualified for promotion from non -executive to executive post in E -1 grade. He was exempted from the pre -selection training course, prescribed for promotion from non -executive to executive, in E -1 grade. However, his case was not considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer (Chemical and Refractory) in E -1 grade. He filed a representation on 10.11.1983. Thereafter he submitted second representation on 4.6.1984 to the General Manager (Personnel and Administration) Bokaro Steel Plant, but no action was taken. His third representation to the Managing Director also remained undecided. On 31.12.1986 the General Secretary of the Union, of which the respondent No. 1 was a member, raised industrial dispute but nothing happened thereafter. At the instance of the appellant, the then Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court by order dated 1.3.10.1988, passed in CWJC. No. 1251 of 1987 (R), directed to pass final order in terms of Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act in the conciliation proceeding and send the same to the State Government. But on submission of the failure report, the State Government on 24.12.1987 declined to refer the dispute on the ground that no junior to him was promoted. His second writ application, CWJC No. 946 to 1990 (R) challenging the said order dated 24.12.1987 was also dismissed. According to the respondent No. 1, he became eligible for promotion to E -1 grade in the year 1,983, after acquiring the Associate Membership of the Institute of Chemist. However, on 13.12.1992 he was promoted from Analyst to Operative (Chemical) in WSTA (Maintenance), which was a non -executive post. The Manager Personnel (OD) Bokaro Steel Plant issued a letter dated 20.3.1992 to him stating therein as under : - - "As per the revised Promotion Policy/Rules for promotion from nonexecutive to executive cadre, a professionally qualified non -executive is required to have put in a minimum seven years service in L -8 grade. You were promoted to L -8 grade, on 24.3.1988 and possess the qualifications of B.Sc. and Diploma in AIC (Associate, Member of Indian Chemist India). It may thus be seen that you are eligible for being considered for promotion to E -O grade......Your contention that the next position in the LoP of Analyst is Assistant Divisional Engineer or Junior Manager in E -1 grade is not correct. So is your allegation about discrimination against or deviation from rules insofar as the case relating to your promotion to the executive post is concerned."
(3.) THE respondent No. 1 challenged the said communication in CWJC No. 2239 of 1995 (R), which was heard and allowed by the impugned order dated 21.8.2003; by the learned Single Judge with following observations : - - "Taking into consideration the entire facts of the case I am of the definite opinion that petitioner became entitled to promotion with all consequential benefits in executive grade at least with effect from 1995. In the impugned order as contained in Annexure -10 to the writ application which was issued in 1992 the reason for not giving promotion to the petitioner was that he did not complete 7 years of service in L -8 grade. According to their own case the petitioner become eligible and qualified for promotion in 1995 and therefore, the respondents ought to have promoted the petitioner to executive grade in at least 1995.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.