Back
ARIJIT BANERJEE, KAUSIK CHANDA
Ahasanul Hoque – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Kausik Chanda, J. - The writ petitioner/appellant approached the learned Single Judge with a prayer for setting aside an order dated May 3, 2012, whereby the respondent no.4 had cancelled the promotion of the petitioner as Head assistant of Bardhaman Zilla Parishad. Challenge was also thrown to the validity of an administrative instruction being memo no. 5418/PN/O/III/2a-38/03 dated November 20, 2006 issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of West Bengal relying upon which the order dated May 3, 2012 was issued.
2. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the appellant was an employee of the State Government and as such the appellant should have approached the competent forum instead of 'invoking its Constitutional writ jurisdiction' of this Court. The writ petition was disposed of granting liberty to the appellant to approach the competent forum for redressal of his grievance.
3. Before us the parties were ad idem that appellant was not an employee of the State Government since he was employed under a Zilla Parishad and he could not have approached the State administrative Tribunal for redressal of his grievance. accordingly, this Cour
The main legal point established in the judgment is that statutory rules prevail over executive instructions, and an executive instruction cannot substantially alter the recruitment procedure establi....
The court established that promotions must adhere to seniority rules based on continuous service, invalidating promotions conducted without a proper inter-se seniority list.
Corrigendum issued by an Executive Authority cannot substitute the provisions contained in the Recruitment & Promotion Rules framed under provision to Article 309 of the Constitution of India.
Promotion based on merit must be prioritized over seniority, requiring a comparative assessment of candidates' qualifications and service records.
Promotions must be made in accordance with the merit-cum-seniority list prepared as per Rule 3 of G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 26.01.2009, and ignoring seniority to promote juniors is a violation of the rule p....
The principle of seniority-cum-merit mandates fair consideration for promotions, and failure to do so violates fundamental rights.
Appointments made in violation of statutory rules are in violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and are in nullity.
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
