Back
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Sanjay K. Agrawal
D.S. Pawar, S/o Shri Buddhan Singh Pawar – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Order :
(Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.)
1. Since common question of law and fact is involved in the present batch of three Writ Petitions, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being decided by this common Order.
2. All the Petitioners in the three Writ Petitions were promoted on the post of Head of Department (‘HOD’ for short) with effect from 14.6.2007. During their promotion on the post of HOD, Chhattisgarh Technical Education (Gazetted) Service (Teaching Cadre- Polytechnic) Recruitment Rules , 2005 were applicable (‘Rules of 2005’ for short). The said Rules of 2005 were later on repealed and new rules namely – Chhattisgarh Technical Education (Teaching Cadre-Polytechnic) (Gazetted) Service Rules, 2014 (‘Rules of 2014’ for short) came into force with effect from 12.5.2014. In Schedule- IV framed under Rules 14 and 15 of the Rules of 2014, qualification and experience for promotion from the post of HOD to the post of Principal have been prescribed, by which the candidate must have three years minimum period of experience as HOD (Engineering/Technical) for eligibility of promotion and she/he also must have prescribed qualification of Bachelor’s degree and Master’s degree of
The right to be considered for promotion is determined by the rules in force at the time of consideration, not by prior rules, as established by Supreme Court precedent.
when a new post is created, the concept of Rules obtaining when the vacancies arose is inappiicable as what is created is a new post on account of re-structuring of the cadre.
The amendment affecting chances of promotion for employees does not necessarily constitute a change in the conditions of service, and the State has the power to unilaterally amend service rules.
The amendment mandating a Bachelor's Degree for certain promotions was constitutionally valid, emphasizing the employer's prerogative to set qualification standards related to job responsibilities.
The court clarified that for teacher promotions under Rule 14, five years of continuous service is required, but it does not need to be in the subject of the promoted post.
The court upheld the validity of amended promotion rules, ruling they apply prospectively and that participation in the selection process waives the right to challenge it.
The right to consideration for promotion is governed by the rules in effect at the time of consideration, not those in place when vacancies arose.
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
