w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Ajoy Debarma, West Tripura v/s The Indian Council of Forestry Research & Education, An autonomous Body Under the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, Government of India, Uttarkhand & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- A G RESEARCH PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U85120TG2014PTC093661

Company & Directors' Information:- I AND D RESEARCH PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140DL2003PTC118439

Company & Directors' Information:- FOREST X INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900PN2020FTC192220

Company & Directors' Information:- K P O COUNCIL OF INDIA [Active] CIN = U85300DL2020NPL368920

Company & Directors' Information:- THE INDIAN CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65993TN1946PTC000988

Company & Directors' Information:- A K G FORESTRY LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U01111DL1996PLC081349

Company & Directors' Information:- J B RESEARCH PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920MH2005PTC158461

Company & Directors' Information:- R D FORESTRY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U20221UP1998PTC023135

Company & Directors' Information:- FOREST AND FORESTRY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U70101WB1978PTC031460

Company & Directors' Information:- N K FOREST PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900DL2010PTC203239

Company & Directors' Information:- AJOY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U63090WB1951PTC019623

Company & Directors' Information:- U 2 RESEARCH PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U73100MH2008PTC179902

Company & Directors' Information:- J S D FOREST LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U01122HP1997PLC020307

    Original Application No. 041/00278 of 2019

    Decided On, 11 March 2021

    At, Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati

    By, THE HONOURABLE MRS. MANJULA DAS
    By, JUDICIAL MEMBER & THE HONOURABLE MR. N. NEIHSIAL
    By, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

    For the Applicant: C.S. Sinha, Advocate. For the Respondents: S.K. Ghosh, Addl. C.G.S.C.



Judgment Text

Manjula Das, Judicial Member.1. This case has been filed for setting aside of the decision of the Level 1 Screening Committee meeting on 27.11.2018. Applicant also prays for setting aside and quashing of the order dated 25.07.2019 issued by the Director General, Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (hereinafter would be referred to as ICFRE) by which grading given by the reviewing authority in the APAR for the year 2017-18 had been retained.2. Heard Sri C S Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.K. Ghosh, learned Addl. C.G.S.C. for the respondents.3. The limited issue before us is as to whether duly completed APAR for the year 2017-18 has been communicated to the applicant within the time or not. In the present case, learned counsel for the applicant argued that the Screening Committee meeting held on 27.11.2018 while considering the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Scientist C from Scientist had taken into consideration the uncommunicated APAR of the applicant for the year 2017-18. It is the positive argument of the learned counsel for the applicant that the APAR for 2017-18 was never communicated to the applicant before the meeting of Level 1 Screening Committee.4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that APAR and grading and all had been communicated to the applicant in the month of September, 2018 and he did make representation on 10.12.2018 and 11.12.2018.5. By countering the said arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respondents, learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submitted that the APAR for the year 2017-18 has never been communicated to the applicant before he had requested for it on 06.12.2018. Learned counsel submitted that he requested to uphold his APAR vide his email dated 6th & 7th December, 2018 and he was intimated about the same vide email on 7th December, 2018. On receipt of the same the applicant submitted the representation for upgradation of the APAR for 2017-18 in time i.e. on 10.12.2018.6. We note that as per provisions of DoPT OM dated 15.05.2009, the stipulated period of submission of representation against the grading is 15 days. Hence there is no lapse on the part of the applicant in making the representation in time. We have also noted that the said representation was disposed of on 25.07.2019. Thus, it is not disputed that the representation was disposed of after the meeting of Screening Committee meeting held on 27.11.2018.7. The point is that though upgradation was not made to the Benchmark by the authority that is not concerned in this case inasmuch as OM dated 14.05.2009 issued by the DoPT ought to have been followed by the authority while intimating the APAR to the applicant. In the instant case, though the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that APAR had been communicated in the month of September, 2018, there is no proof of evidence to establish his submission. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant submitted documentary evidence i.e. email dated 17.12.2018 received from the department which clearly says as “Kindly find information along with attachment sent herewith as desired over phone”. This information was provided in response to applicant’s mail dated 06.12.2018 as “Kindly check whether my recent APAR/AWR (2017-18) has been uploaded in PIMS. The PIMS is not accessible from FRCLE, Agartala due to lack of VPN (Virtual Private Network). If it is uploaded, kindly forward me the soft copy please.” Thus, it is apparent to believe that APAR for the year 2017-18 has not been communicated to the applicant in time thus thereby the respondents had violate

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

d the provisions of DoPT OM dated 14.05.2009.8. We, therefore, deem it fit and proper to direct the respondents to hold review selection committee meeting to consider the case of the applicant for promotion by ignoring the APAR 2017-18 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. Ordered accordingly.9. OA is disposed of accordingly. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
O R