Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
Babu P.S. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks promotion and legal rights. (Para 2) |
| 2. petitioner argues against wrongful delay and violation of seniority. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court directs decision on representations and balances equities. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. writ petition is disposed with directions. (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral):--The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. By way of the present petition, Petitioner seeks directions to the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to promote the Petitioner to the rank of EO/SSPO (2 IC) under the Directorate General Border Security Force, Air Wing Officers (Group `A' & Group `B' posts) Recruitment Rules, 1999 read with 3.1.3 - `Retention of Existing Eligibility Service' in the Office Memorandum dated 31st December, 2010 issued by Department of Personnel and Training. Petitioner also prays that his promotion in terms of prayer (a) be considered effective from 01st January, 2021 and ahead of the promotion of Respondent No. 3, to safeguard and maintain the seniority of the Petitioner. Petitioner further seeks declaration that the relaxation granted by Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.3 and the consequent promotion of Respondent No.3
Promotions in public service must adhere to established eligibility criteria, ensuring equal treatment and safeguarding fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19, and 21.
The court emphasized that delays in pursuing promotion claims under Article 226 undermine the validity of such petitions, reinforcing discretion in granting relief based on timeliness.
Administrative delays in service regularization do not preclude rightful promotions based on established seniority.
Promotion in public service must adhere to seniority principles, and arbitrary actions undermining this principle are impermissible.
Delay in regularising services and fulfilling service qualifications cannot be used to deny promotion, especially when the delay is attributable to the authorities.
The punishment of 'censure' cannot be used as a ground for denial of promotion, and delay and latches cannot be pleaded against the petitioner.
Point of Law : The word used in the relaxation rules is "may" and therefore, the same would mean that relaxation may be given at the discretion of the competent authority.
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
