The appellants case was that he was deprived of the opportunity of acquiring the requisite qualification for promotion as he was initially placed under suspension and subsequently removed from service.
On 8.2.1983, an order was passed to reinstate the appellant in service with all companysequential reliefs with arrears of salary.
The factual background is as follows Appellant joined the Indo Tibetan Border Police Force as a Constable on 7.1.1967.
Representation was made by the appellant to the companycerned authorities for granting relief in terms of the High Courts orders.
In March, 1984 the appellant qualified Radio Operator Grade II test and in June 1986 he qualified in the Grade I test.
He became eligible for departmental promotion test i.e. D test subsequently.
By order dated 1.3.1976, the appellant was ordered to be removed from service.
He was subsequently acquitted in that criminal case.
The appellant filed Civil Writ Petition No.324/1976 in the High Court praying for the quashing of the aforesaid order of removal from service.
As numbered above, appellant was acquitted in the criminal case by judgment dated 31.5.1979.
By order dated 24.4.1976 the appeal was rejected by the appellate authority.
Notice was given to him for proposing disciplinary action for number reporting at Taradevi.
During the period of suspension, appellant was directed to stay at Taradevi and number to leave the Headquarters.
The appellant again filed the C.W.P. No.16/1987 in the High Court for grant of companysequential reliefs.
After enquiry the appellant was held guilty of charge of deserting the services during the period of suspension.
On 14.2.1976 show cause numberice was issued to the appellant to show cause as to why the punishment of removal from service shall number be imposed upon him.
After reinstatement he qualified at the requisite tests and on the basis of such qualification he shall be deemed to have acquired the right to be companysidered along with his juniors when the companysideration was made.
The High Court allowed the writ petition by order dated 4.1.1983 and directed that all companysequential reliefs be given to the appellant.
On 11.9.1973 he was suspended from service as a criminal case was registered against him.
In 1969 he was promoted as Head Constable.
On 18.9.1987 during the pendency of the writ petition respondents 5 to 9 were promoted.
Civil Writ Petition No.562/87 was filed by the appellant challenging promotion given to respondents 5 to 9.
On 25.10.1974 his application for station leave was rejected and he was directed to stay at Taradevi.
Appellant challenges the judgments of a Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court at Shimla holding that the appellant was number entitled to the benefit of promotion from the date his juniors were granted promotion.
According to the appellant they were junior in service to the appellant.
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. These appeals are interlinked and are disposed of by this companymon judgment.
The same was number accepted by the companycerned authorities.
