IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Satish Chandra Sharma, Subramonium Prasad, JJ.
Shilpi Agarwal (Dr.) - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 7570 of 2008
Decided On : 06-01-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the case (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners' requests and claims (Para 3 , 11) |
| 3. promotion criteria for associate professors (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. consideration for eligibility in promotions (Para 10 , 12 , 18) |
| 5. distinction of cited cases (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT
Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J. The Petitioners before this Court have filed the present writ petition being aggrieved by the common Judgment and Order dated 17.01.2008, in O.A. Nos.1099/2007 and 1103/2007, passed by the Ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (Ld. CAT) ("Impugned Order").
2. Vide the Impugned Order, the Ld. CAT had dismissed the Petitioners prayer for quashing/modifying the Order No. A-32012/02/2006-CHS.III dated 21.12.2006 and Order No. 32012/2/2006-CHS.III dated 11.01.2007 along with the consequential promotions. Further, the Petitioners prayer for directing the Respondent No. 1 & 2 therein to promote the Petitioners to the post/grade of Professor in the Central Health Services ("CHS") was also rejected.
3. Before us, the Petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs-
"(a) set aside judgment and order dated 17.01.2008 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in OA Nos. 1099/2007 & 1103/07; and
(b) grant the prayer as made by the petitioners in OA Nos. 1099/2007 & 1103/07.
(c) pass any such further order or direction as may be deemed fit, proper, necessary and expedient."
4. The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the Petitioners are members of the Central Health Services and are governed under the provisions of Central Health Services Rules, 1996. The Petitioners, upon their selection by the Union Public Services Commission ("UPSC") were appointed in the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, in the Grade of Assistant Professor (Specialist Grade II - Junior Scale) of the Teaching Sub-Cadre in the Department of Pathology, Lady Hardinge Medical College, New Delhi. It has been stated that the next higher post in the relevant hierarchy is Associate Professor, to be filled by direct recruitment, whereas Associate Professor (other than super specialty) is to be filled by promotion on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness without linkage to vacancies. An Assistant Professor with 2 years of regular service in the grade becomes eligible for promotion to the post of Associate Professor. Accordingly, vide Order No. A32012/4/2000 dated 20.02.2000 of the Respondents, Assistant Professors (Specialist Grade II - Junior Scale Teaching Sub-Grade) were promoted as Associate Professors. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were promoted to the Post of Associate Professor on 20.04.2001 and 10.01.2002, respectively.
5. The statutory provisions as contained under the Central Health Services Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the `Rules of 1996') provide for promotion to the next higher post, i.e., Specialist Grade-I, Professor. The post of Specialist Grade-I, Professor is to be filled 100% by promotion on non-selection basis without linkage to the vacancies, failing which, by Direct Recruitment. The Rules further provide that an Associate Professor with 6 years of regular service in the grade or an Associate Professor with 8 years combined regular service in the grades of Associate Professor and Assistant Professor is eligible to be promoted as Specialist Grade-I, Professor.
6. The records of the case further reveal that initially the post of Associate Professor was treated to be non-functional. As per Office Memorandum dated 09.10.1999 issued for promotion to the next higher grade, the selection procedure to be followed require at least two "Very Good" gradings in the person's last 5 ACRs. Further, as per the guidelines issued by the DoP&T, the benchmark for promotion to the post of Professor - which is equivalent to Non-Functional Selection Grade, provided that an officer's overall performance should be good with at least two "Very Good" gradings during the last five years, whereas
The DACP Scheme's prospective application allows consideration of prior service for promotion benefits, correcting the promotion date based on actual service.
The Dynamic Assured Career Progression Scheme must consider prior service for promotion, and the promotion date should reflect actual service milestones rather than the scheme's effective date.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is the importance of parity in promotions and the application of Rule 35 of the Rules of 1962 to allow for relaxation of rules in exceptional case....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.