Back
MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
Subhash Chandra Sharma And Anr – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Anr Ors – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. - Present writ petition has been filed challenging the letter dated 10th March, 2021 issued by the Respondents wherein the Petitioners were reverted from the posts of Assistant Sub-Inspector to Head Constable despite being promoted to the posts of ASI in the year 2016. Petitioners also seek directions to the Respondents to maintain the status quo in the rank of the Petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioners states that the Petitioners were appointed in Railway Protection Force and Railway Protection Special Force as Constables and were promoted to the rank of Head Constable in 2002. He further states that the Petitioners were subsequently promoted to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspectors in 2016.
3. He states that Respondents passed an order dated 18th April 2019, which relates to the order passed in case of WP(C) No.11293/2016 (Gurupratap's case) for compliance to which the present Petitioners were not parties. He emphasises that the grievance of the Petitioners were aggravated when the Respondents vide the Impugned Letter dated 10th March, 2021 passed orders and prepared a seniority list where the Petitioners names appeared in the list of Head Constable
The court emphasized the importance of providing an opportunity for representation and the need for reasoned disposal of the representation within a specified timeframe.
Promotion orders in employment must adhere to proper procedures, and affected parties have the right to contest decisions that adversely impact their employment status.
Promotions under Rule 70 of RPF Rules must be reflected in seniority listings, and prior judgments affecting individuals must be precisely interpreted to uphold their rights.
The court held that the persons not party to a case cannot be bound by its judgment and emphasized the need for a reasoned order regarding seniority disputes.
The court upheld the validity of a change in promotion criteria and ruled that the petitioners' claims for retrospective promotion were barred by res judicata due to a prior judgment.
Settled seniority cannot be unsettled after the lapse of several years, and belated claims for retrospective promotion can disrupt the established seniority and promotion positions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consequences of concealing material facts and the voluntariness of the petitioners' applications to work in RPF as Constables in Kashmir Valley....
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
