DIPAK MISRA,J. - (1.)CALLING in question the legal defensibility of the order dated 14th December, 2010 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (for short the tribunal) in OA No. 718/2010, the Union of India and its functionaries have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashment of the same.
(2.)THE facts which are necessary to be stated for the purpose of adjudication of this writ petition are that the first respondent approached the tribunal in OA No.2846/2009 for issuance of a direction to the respondents therein to take action on the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) and the tribunal vide order dated 12th October, 2009 directed that the applicant therein was at least entitled to know the reasons why the recommendations made by duly constituted DPC had not been given effect to and, accordingly, directed the respondents therein to deal with the representation dated 24.09.2009. After the said order, the present petitioners, who were the respondents before the tribunal, gave the following information to the first respondent herein: Subject: Representation dated 24.9.2009 from Shri LR Meena, DDGM (ISSD) reg. promotion to the post of ADGM on implementation of DPC. The undersigned is directed to refer to the subject mentioned above and in pursuance of order dated 12.10.2009 of Hon. CAT, Principal Bench in OA No.2846/2009 and order dated 1.12.2009 in MA No.2400/2009 in OA No.2846/2009, the matter has been dealt with in accordance with law and the following information is passed on to the applicant:- 2. The point wise information sought by Shri LR Meena in his representation dated 24.9.09 and the reply thereof is tabled below:
Sl. No. Point wise information sought by Shri LR Meena Reply 2. The recommendation of the duly constituted Departmental Promotion Committee approved by the DoPT/UPSC may kindly be made effective with the approval of competent authority, if required, in the light of existing recruitment rules. Recommendations of DPC are under process. 3. Since he is holding the post of DDGM since 30.11.2005 and, therefore, he may be considered for promotion form his date of eligibility in the light of existing vacancies and recruitment rules for the post of ADGM as per the Supreme Court judgment dated 04.03.2.193 in Civil Appeal No.2954-55 an 2956-57 of 1980- Y.V. Rangalah and Ors. Vs. J. Sreenivasa Rao and Ors. Action is underway to consider the DPC recommendation by competent authority. 4. The Bio-data called for the post from DDGMs for the next promotion may be kept in abeyance till recruitment rules are approved by the competent authority and notified. Promotions are considered as per extant RRs.

After the said information was furnished, the first respondent preferred the OA No. 718/2010 for issue of a command to the petitioners to take necessary action on the recommendations of the DPC and to accord the benefit of promotion to him from the date he is entitled to. It was asserted before the tribunal by the applicant therein that he is in the cadre of Deputy Director General of Meteorology in Indian Meteorology Department (IMD) and a DPC for promotion to the post of Additional Director General Meteorology (ADGM) met in February, 2009 to fill up the existing two vacant posts, namely ADGM (Services) and ADGM (Sat. Com.) and two more posts as they fell vacant in the same cadre (due to retirement of two officers), but the departmental authorities did not act on the recommendations of the DPC despite the steps taken for filling up the promotional posts. It was urged that the department, instead of carrying out the recommendations of the DPC held in 2009, decided to hold a meeting of the Assessment Board by letter dated 16.9.2009 for considering the cases of eligible scientists in the cadre of Scientist D (Director) and Scientist E (DDGM) to the next grade. It was put forth before the tribunal that the Director General, Additional Director General and Deputy Director General of Meteorology (Group Aposts) Recruitment Rules, 1994 (for short the 1994 Rules) were still in force and promotions have to be regulated as per the said Rules. It was urged that the respondents therein had admitted that the promotions have to be considered as per the recruitment rules till they are amended. It was contended that despite the post having fallen vacant and a DPC having been held as per the prescribed procedure, the department has not filled up the vacancies and a direction was required to give effect to the recommendations of the DPC. Reliance was placed on the decisions rendered in Management of M/s MS Nally Bharat Engineering Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar & Ors., (1990) 2 SCC 48 and Nirmal Chandra Bhattacharjee & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., 1991 Supp. (2) SCC 363.

(3.)THE stand put forth by the applicant before the tribunal was combated by the department contending, inter alia, that the amendment of the recruitment rules was underway and, therefore, the department and justified in withholding the result of the DPC. It was further set forth that the applicant had already been promoted to the grade of Scientist Eand assumed the charge of that post.