K.S.P.V. Pavan Kumar, Ifs v. The Union of India and 6 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010266842024 ooooooo 2024:GAU-AS:12941-DB ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/6804/2024o K.S.P.V.oPAVANoKUMAR,oIFSo S/OoSHRIoK.V.NoNAGENDRAoSAYEE,o RESIDENToOFoC-205,oUIVERSALoECOGREENoAPARTMENT,oAHOMGAON,o BETKUCHI,oGUWAHATIoDIST.oKAMRUPoMoASSAMo781040 VERSUSo

1.THEoUNIONoOFoINDIAoANDo6oORS.o REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoINDIA,oMINISTRYo OFoENVIRONMENToANDoFORESToPARYABARANoBHAWAN,oC.G.Oo COMPLEX,oLODHIoROAD,oNEWoDELHIo110003 2:THEoSTATEoOFoASSAM oREPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCHIEFoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oJANATAoBHAWANoDISPURoGUWAHATIo781006 3:THEoSPECIALoSECRETARY oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oENVIRONMENToANDoFORESToDEPARTMENT oDISPURoGUWAHATIo781006 4:THEoSECRETARY oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oENVIRONMENToANDoFORESToDEPARTMENT oDISPURoGUWAHATIo781006 5:THEoPRINCIPALoCHIEFoCONSERVATORoOFoFORESToANDoHEADoOFo FORESToFORCEoASSAMoPANJABARIoGUWAHATIo781037oASSAM 6:DR.oVINAYoGUPTAoIFS oPRINCIPALoCHIEFoCONSERVATORoOFoFORESTo(WILDLIFE)oANDoCHIEFo WILDLIFEoWARDENoASSAMoPANJABARIoGUWAHATIo781037 Page No.# 2/3 7:THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR RAJGARH ROAD BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI 78100 For the Petitioner : Mr. A. Chakraborty, Advocate. : Ms. L. Das, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Roy, Central Government Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 7. : Mr. P.N. Goswami, Additional Advocate General, Assam assisted by Mr. U. Pathak, Advocate for respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5. – BEFORE – HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

19.12.2024 (Vijay Bishnoi, CJ)

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 18.11.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred as 'CAT'), Guwahati Bench in Original Application (in short, O.A.) No.263/2024. The petitioner has approached the CAT raising a grievance that the respondents have illegally refused to promote him from the post of Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and instead promoted respondent No.6 though he is junior to him. The CAT, while admitting the O.A., preferred by the writ petitioner, has fixed the matter on 16.01.2025 granting time to the counsel for the respondents to file their written statement and liberty to the petitioner to file rejoinder to the same, if desired so. The CAT has also observed that any Promotional Order so issued that involves the applicant per se will be subject to the outcome of this O.A. Page No.# 3/3 Mr. A. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the CAT has not made the promotion of the respondent No.6 subject to the outcome of this O.A. We are of the view that the observation of the CAT to the effect that any Promotional Order so issued that involves applicant per se will be subject to the outcome of this O.A. is very clear which means that the proceedings of promotion undertaken by the respondent Department would remain subject to the outcome of the O.A. preferred by the petitioner. Hence, no interference is called for. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed at the motion stage itself.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant