Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
More support for an independent Palestine
access_time 24 May 2024 12:02 PM GMT
When toxins flow through Periyar once again
access_time 23 May 2024 5:34 AM GMT
Eight years balance sheet of LDF government
access_time 22 May 2024 4:58 AM GMT
Ebrahim Raisi
access_time 21 May 2024 5:20 AM GMT
Chabahar Port
access_time 20 May 2024 4:00 AM GMT
What is the remedy for this negligence?
access_time 18 May 2024 12:07 PM GMT
Schools breeding hatred
access_time 14 Sep 2023 10:37 AM GMT
access_time 16 Aug 2023 5:46 AM GMT
Ramadan: Its essence and lessons
access_time 13 March 2024 9:24 AM GMT
Homechevron_rightIndiachevron_rightSC refuses to...

SC refuses to discharge DoPT Secy from contempt case for flouting orders on promotion

SC refuses to discharge DoPT Secy from contempt case for flouting orders on promotion

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to discharge the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), from the contempt proceedings for allegedly breaching its status quo order on promotion of Central government employees.

A plea has been filed by Debananda Sahoo, through advocate Kumar Parimal, against top officers of the Union government for violation of the top court's order of April 15, 2019. In Nagraj (2006) and Jarnail Singh (2018), the apex court laid down conditionalities like collection of data on inadequacy of representation, overall effect on efficiency on administration and removing creamy layers, before considering reservation in promotion, it said.

"The promotion order was issued without reviewing select list of Under Secretaries for the year 2003 and onwards and consequential review of Deputy Secretary select list of 2003 and onwards in terms of Constitution bench judgements in M. Nagaraj and Jarnail Singh," the plea claimed.

Subsequently, on April 9, the top court had issued contempt notice to the Secretary, seeking explanation on a plea claiming breach of status quo order of the top court on promotion of Central government employees.

Attorney General K.K. Venugopal, representing the Centre, contended that there was material suppression of facts in the contempt petition and only "temporary and ad hoc promotions" have been made as he urged the top court to discharge the official against the backdrop of these facts.

However, a bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose, declined to accept the argument and scheduled the matter for further hearing in the second week of August.

Show Full Article
TAGS:Supreme Courtcontempt caseDoPT Secy
Next Story