CAT reserves order on Sreekumar petition, arguments conclude

Ahmedabad, Aug 25 (UNI) Arguments today concluded at the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on the petition filed by Additional Director General of Police R B Sreekumar against the state government for denying him promotion in February last year.

The CAT bench reserved its order for a later date.

The Gujarat government had last year denied him promotion, as there was a 20-year-old case pending against him when he was District Superintendent of Police of Kutch. Mr Sreekumar had challenged the supercession and the sealed cover procedure adopted by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) to decide his case.

In his argument, Mr Sreekumar's advocate N H Servai pointed out that this was probably the first time a person was being denied promotion on the basis of a private complaint. He said the sealed cover procedure is resorted only in cases where chargesheet has been issued, which was not the case with Mr Sreekumar.

''No chargesheet has been issued against him,'' he said.

Taking on the government's contention that Mr Sreekumar should have informed the appointing authority about the cases pending against him, Mr Seervai cited a Ministry of Home Affairs letter 1961 which said the officer should not enter into direct correspondence with the state government.

He also termed the government's contention as ''totally false'' that Mr Sreekumar was given promotion in August 2000. He pointed out that the DPC had on November 16, 1998, decided his promotion to Additional Director General of Police, which he took up in August 2000 on his retutn to the state after his deputation.

Mr Seervai also submitted that as the DPC which met on February last year, did not have a case against his client after he was exonerated in the ISRO espionage case on January 24 that year. It therefore pulled out a 20-year-old private complaint to deny him promotion, he said.

Earlier, the Gujarat government's counsel, Sumit Shah, submitted an application which gave the background of the three promotions which Mr Sreekumar had got in the past. He said the trial of the case against the officer had commenced and he had made an appearance and also applied for discharge. ''If there has been an inordinate delay, he should have appealed before the magistrate, before complaining to CAT. The petitioner had a chance to make an effort for an expeditious inquiry,'' he said.

On the point that the Government had been giving Mr Sreekumar legal aid to fight the Kutch case, he said that did not mean that the Government was presuming that the officer was innocent.

The division bench comprising Justice A S Sanghvi and Justice Shanker Prasad, will pass the orders on a later date.

UNI MMG MJ AW AK RK2122