Promotion denied due to pending vig. enquiry case
Kishore Malkunaik
(Querist) 07 September 2018
This query is : Resolved
I am working in Railway protection force (Security department of Railway) as Asst. Sub-Inspector. In promotion restructuring scheme w.e.f 01.04.2017 in railway security department my name was enlisted for promotion to the rank of Sub-Inspector among the suitable employees for 86 vacancies. But in final order in the month of September-2017 my name was not found and my junior was promoted w.e.f 01.04.2017. After my repeated application the RPF department replied that a vigilance case is pending investigation against me and hence my promotion kept in sealed cover but the same was not informed me before DPC, and in the prior enlisting and also prior this was not informed , no memo, no any suspension, no criminal case is pending. I filled the Writ petition in the Hon'ble court on 27.07.2018. After that on 05.09.2018 they issued me major penalty charge sheet on the recommendation of railway vigilance branch . My promotion effect date was 01.04.2017 and department issued charge sheet me on 05.09.2018 is it correct procedure. Please provide opinion sir
Guest
(Expert) 07 September 2018
If selected by DPC, your promotion could not be withheld on the ground of pending vigilance case, if charge sheet was issued after the date of DPC. In the absence of any charge sheet, keeping recommendation in your case under sealed cover was irregular.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 08 September 2018
already replied at
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/Promotion-denied-due-to-pending-vigilance-case-investigation-687086.asp
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 08 September 2018
repeated
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/D-ar-in-railway-deparment--691471.asp
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 08 September 2018
You have already engaged an able, competent and intelligent lawyer to take care of your case, why do you seek obligation of experts on this platform except the fact it is available FREE OF COST?
It is absurd, ridiculous and stupidity to repeat same story time and again. If you are not satisfied with the obligation of experts, prefer to seek professional consultancy from another local prudent lawyer practicing service matters.
