The orders of the Tribunal, passed on 14.2.96 and 27.2.96 were challenged by the State Government in a Writ Petition No.
THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1998 Present Honble Mr. Justice S. Saghir Ahmad Honble Mr. Justice G.B. Pattanaik Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Sr.
1420 of 1996 before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh which by its order dated 15.4.96 stayed the operation of the aforesaid order as also further proceedings in M.A.32/96.
Mrs. Madhur Dadlani, Satish K. Agnihotri, Advs.
Both these memoranda were companysidered by this Court in Union of India Ors.
with him for the appellant L. Sanghi, Sr.
S.K. Gambhir, Vivek Gambhir, Advs.
A further order for status quo was passed by the Tribunal on 27.2.96 Respondent No.1 in the meantime, filed anther O.A. No.
1, thereafter, filed another case A.No.
While the matter was pending before the Tribunal, a fresh charge sheet was issued to respondent No.
A dated January 12, 1988 was issued.
1219/94 in the Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal for short, the Tribunal on the ground that besides companytaining stale charges it was issued with the male fide intention to forestall the companysideration of his name for inclusion in the panel of candidates for promotion to the post of chief Engineer EM .
with him for the Respondent Sakesh Kumar, K.L.Hathi, Advs.
876/95 before the Tribunal for the relief that the State Government may be directed to companyvene the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee for companysidering his name for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer and that the State Government may be restrained from starting any fresh departmental proceeding.
for the Respondent No.2 J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court was delivered SAGHIR AHMAD, J. Respondent No.1 while working as superintending Engineer EM in the public Health Engineering Department was issued a charge sheet on 16.11.94 which was challenged by him in O.A.No.
The Tribunal which already had before it the application of the State Government for extension of the time M.A.32/96 , for companyvening the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee, passed an order on 14.2.96 restraining the State Government from promoting any person junior to respondent No.1 to the post of chief Engineer.
The further relief that numberfresh departmental proceedings be initiated against him was refused by the Tribunal.
for M s. Hathi Co., Advs.
1 and 2 others were kept in the Sealed Cover.
On 31st of January, 1996 state Government filed an application before the Tribunal for extension of time for companyvening the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee but the Tribunal instead of granting extension, directed, by its order dated 2.2.96, to produce the original records before it so that it may be found out as to why the companyvening of the Departmental Promotion companymittee was being delayed.
This O.A. was disposed of finally by the Tribunal by its order dated 8.12.95 and the direction was issued to the appellant to hold the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee within six weeks.
This Procedure was adopted by the Departmental Promotion Committee because of the pendency of the departmental proceedings against Respondent No.1 on the basis of the charge sheet issued to him on 5.2.96.
