Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4306 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12402 of 2024 Petitioner :- Shamsher Jamadagni Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of State Tax U.P. Lko. Counsel for Petitioner :- Shireesh Kumar,Utkarsh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Shireesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that censure entry was awarded to the petitioner while he was working on the post of Joint Commissioner, State Tax on 21.05.2013, which was quashed by the U.P. State Public Service Tribunal in Claim Petition No. 1703 of 2014 by means of judgment dated 03.06.2015. 3. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the State Government has preferred writ petition against judgment and order dated 03.06.2015 being Writ Petition No. 6274 (S/B) of 2016, wherein the Division Bench of this Court had taken note of the fact that the petitioner has already been promoted prior to filing of writ petition to the post of Joint Commissioner, and in order to clarify the circumstances for challenging the judgment and order of Tribunal, the Court directed the Principal Secretary, Tax & Institutional Finance, Government of U.P., Lucknow to appear before the Court. 4. it is submitted that the Principal Secretary, Tax & Institutional Finance, Government of U.P., Lucknow, informed the Court that normally, in case, where single minor punishment is awarded the same is overlooked while considering promotion of the person concerned. It is stated that despite aforesaid statement having been made by the senior officer of the Sate Government, case of the petitioner was not taken up for consideration for promotion to the next higher post i.e. Additional Commissioner, Grade-II, State Tax. 5. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that censure entry relates to the year 2013 and according to Government Order dated 27.09.2019, life of censure entry would be five years and service record of previous ten years is to be taken into consideration while promoting the Government servant. Even if, the said adverse entry would have remained on record, same would have become ineffective at the time of promotion of the petitioner. It is stated that merely on the ground of the fact that writ petition has been filed by the State Government against the order of U.P. State Public Service Tribunal, that candidature of the petitioner is not being considered for promotion. 6. Regarding aforesaid circumstances, this Court by means of order dated 08.01.2025 had directed the respondents to take instructions and inform this Court as to why case of the petitioner is not being considered for promotion. 7. Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions received from the Joint Commissioner (Legal), State Tax, Lucknow, it has been informed that the case of the petitioner came up for promotion for the year 2024-25 on 13.09.02024 and the petitioner was not considered for promotion as he was put in the list of deferred candidates. In the written instructions no reason has been assigned as to why case of the petitioner has been put in the list of deferred candidate. The written instructions are taken on record. 8. Learned Standing Counsel also could not inform this Court for the reasons by which the petitioner could have been denied promotion. Though, he has opposed the writ petition but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. Considering rival contentions it is noticed that censure entry which was awarded to the petitioner on 21.05.2013 was set aside by the U.P. State Public Service Tribunal on 03.06.2015 and subsequently writ petition was filed before this Court which is pending. There is no dispute with regard to facts that no interim order has been passed in favour of the State in the said writ petition, while on the contrary this Court on noticing the fact that petitioner has already been promoted to next higher post after award of the censure entry, has summoned the Government Officer, who gave statement before the Court that censure entry is not taken into consideration at the stage of promotion. 11. Even otherwise, this Court finds that case of the petitioner is adequately covered by the Government Order dated 27.09.2019 where a censure entry looses its effect after a period of five years. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that previous 10 years service record of the petitioner is to be considered for grant of promotion and in the aforesaid circumstances, considering the fact that firstly said censure entry is non existing due to it having been set aside by the Tribunal and secondly, even if it were existing its effect would be void-ab- intio as per Government Order dated 27.09.2019, and hence there is no reason for non consideration of the petitioner for promotion. 12. 12. Accordingly, this Court do not find any reason for non consideration of the candidature of petitioner for promotion to the next higher post of Additional Commissioner, Grade-II, State Tax. 13. In the light of above, present writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner for promotion for the selection year 2024-25, from the date of consideration of his juniors, expeditiously, say within two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order to the post of Additional Commissioner, Grade-II, State Tax. Order Date :- 22.1.2025 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench