Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.S.KARNIK, N.R.BORKAR
State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary (Forests) Revenue & Forest Dept. – Appellant
Versus
Uddhao Pandurang Patil – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. right to promotion by induction (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. tribunal's direction to reconsider induction (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. cadre review process and eligibility (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. government's duty in cadre review (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. court's decision and dismissal of petitions (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
M.S. KARNIK, J.
1. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 9th October 2014 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay Bench, Mumbai (“Tribunal” for short) in Original Application (O.A.) No. 777 of 2011. By the said order, the Tribunal directed the Union of India as well as the State Government to reconsider the induction of respondent no.1 to the Indian Forest Service (“IFS” for short). These O.A.’s were disposed of by the Tribunal by a common order. Hence, we dispose these petitions by a common judgment and order. The facts are almost identical. Reference to facts in Writ Petition No. 10958 of 2015 should suffice.
2. Challenging the Tribunal’s order, it is the petitioner – State o
Delay in conducting mandatory cadre reviews jeopardizes the promotion eligibility of employees, infringing upon their fundamental right to be considered for promotion under Article 16 of the Constitu....
The judgment established the mandatory nature of cadre review within five years, the impact of delayed statutory functions on employees' rights, and the court's power to mitigate the hardship caused ....
Officers are entitled to Senior Time Scale upon completing four years of service, irrespective of passing departmental exams; their substantive rights are protected.
The eligibility for promotion and consideration in DPCs is determined by the rules prevalent at the time of consideration, and vacancies are not to be filled invariably by the law existing on the dat....
Judicial review under Article 226 is discretionary and may be exercised despite an alternative remedy, but in this case, the existence of such remedy led to the dismissal of the writ petition.
Seniority depression for delayed joining on own request upheld per rules; claims barred by delay, non-joinder; no parity with dissimilar cases; statutory rules govern over equity claims.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
