Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
AJIT KUMAR, J.
Uttam Kumar and Ors Late Sunil kumar - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Bihar - Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2163 of 2019
With
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10483 of 2023
Decided On : 29-01-2026
Service Law – Promotion – Cancellation – Any administrative action entailing civil consequences (such as demotion or loss of seniority, loss in salary) must adhere to Audi Alteram Partem – Since, petitioners were not given chance to defend their 2018 promotions which was cancelled in year, 2023, to grant promotion to private respondents, order is procedurally ultra vires and violates Article 14 of Constitution – Such unilateral cancellation deserves to be interfered with, to do complete justice – Unless, allegation of fraud or representation are made for fetching such promotions, settled promotion cannot be undone retrospectively, as such action divests promotees from their vested rights – Any administrative order passed in violation of a judicial stay or status quo is a nullity in eyes of law (void ab initio) – Respondents' claim of good faith or compliance with departmental circulars to ensure transparency is legally irrelevant when Apex Court had frozen status of parties – Act of unilaterally revising seniority list and demoting petitioners during subsistence/continuance of stays, authorities have acted without jurisdiction – Administrative transparency cannot be invoked to override a judicial injunction – There has been breach of Principles of Natural Justice, while interfering with promotions, which is said to have been granted in favour of petitioners – Directions issued. (Parad 31 and 32)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. joint hearing of connected writ petitions. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. quashing promotion orders violating court directions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. post-2013: intermediate plus computer knowledge required. (Para 5) |
| 4. court-mandated promotions based on verified 2017 merit list. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. appellate recognition of private respondents' computer qualifications. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. cancellation during stay breaches natural justice. (Para 15 , 16 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. 15% quota promotions follow seniority-cum-eligibility. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 8. provisional lists require objection adjudication before finality. (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 9. set aside orders for fresh verification and process. (Para 35) |
| 10. writs disposed with directions; contempt refrained. (Para 36 , 37 , 39 , 40) |
| 11. stay violations prima facie constitute court contempt. (Para 38) |
JUDGMENT :
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for Respondents-State in the both the writ petitions.
2. Vide order dated 08.02.2024 passed in CWJC No. 2163 of 2019, the instant case was directed to be listed along with CWJC No. 10483 of 2023, after service of notice and since both these cases have common subjects in issue, as such on completion of pleadings of the parties including the private respondents, these matters have been heard together and on conclusion of the arguments of all the parties, accordingly, both the writ petitions are being adjudicated in the following manner.
3. The relief sought for in CWJC No. 2163 of 2019 is as follows:-
“(i) For quashing the office order vide Memo No. 574 dated 26.6.2018 issued by The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Magadh Division, Gaya as contained in Annexure-13 by which direction has been issued to the District Education Officer, Gaya to prepare the Gradation List of Class IV employees and grant promotion to the eligible persons from Class IV to Class Ill indicating the seniority of the petitioners viz private respondents;
(ii) Also for issuance of a writ in the nature of declaration that the decision taken by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Magadh Division, Gaya dated 26.6.2018 as contained in Annexure-13 is contrary to the order dated 16.5.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C.No. 5912 of 2018 as contained in Annexure- mainly on the reasons once the Hon’ble Patna High Court pleased to direct the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Magadh Division, Gaya to take decision upon the recommendation made by the District Education Officer for promotion from Class IV to Class III in which the name of the private respondent does not appear;
(iii) Also for direction to the respondents to not give effect of the office order vide Memo No. 574 dated 26.6.2018 as contained in Annexure-13 against the petitioner specially when their juniors have already been promoted from Class IV to Class III.
iv) And also for necessary direction, relief, order as the petitioners are found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case and eye of law.
4. The relief sought for in CWJC No. 10483 of 2023 is as follows:-
“ (i) For quashing the Office order vide memo no.1914 dated 07/07/23 issued under the signature of District Education Officer, District- Jehanabad as contained in Annexure- 22, by which the Smt. Sushma Kumar, respondent no.8, Smt. Anjani Kumari, respondent no.9, and Sh. Praveen Kumar, respondent no.10 have been promoted from class IV to III clerk and posted in Project Kanya High School- Okari, District-Modanganj, Gandhi Smakrak High School- Sagarpur, District-Makhdumpur, Project Kanya High School, District- Makhdumpur and High School- Bharthu, District-Ghoshi respectively after cancelling of order dated 16/03/18 with retrospective effect as contained in Annexure-13.
(ii). Also, commanding the respondents to allow the petitioners to continue working as class-III employee in their respective place of posting as usual in view of the order date
Retrospective cancellation of promotions without natural justice, during judicial stays, based on un-finalized provisional seniority lists is invalid; requires objection hearing, qualification verifi....
The settlement of disputes related to teachers’ training and the finalization of the seniority list are crucial for determining entitlement to promotion under the relevant rules.
Promotion rights must adhere to seniority rules, with equitable treatment for similarly situated employees.
The promotion of an employee without prior notice or hearing violates principles of natural justice, rendering such actions void and unenforceable.
Promotions cannot be annulled without an adverse order from prior litigation, reaffirming principles of legal continuity and procedural fairness.
Promotions mandated by previous court rulings must be implemented without discrimination, ensuring rights are upheld as per governing laws.
The seniority for promotions in government services must be based on the order of appointment, not merely on merit lists, ensuring compliance with eligibility criteria.
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
