Back
A. S. SUPEHIA, GITA GOPI
Urmila D. Patel – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, 1865, is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge rejecting the captioned writ petition filed by the appellant claiming promotion to the post of Gujarat Administrative Service Class-I (Selection Scale) with retrospective effect.
2. The facts, which are established from the pleadings, are that : -
3. The appellant – original petitioner, who was serving on the post of Additional Collector was considered for promotion to the Gujarat Administrative Service (for short, “GAS”) Class-I (Selection Scale) by the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short, “the DPC”), comprising the Chief Secretary and two other senior most Secretaries on 25.10.2011.
4. The DPC prepared a select list of 34 Officers for being promoted from GAS Class-I (Senior Scale) to GAS Class-I (Selection Scale) and placed the appellant at serial No.5. Thereafter, the file was submitted for obtaining the Government’s Order approving the minutes of the DPC on 05.11.2011 and before any further action was taken on such approval, the appellant retired from the
Promotion to administrative posts requires formal approval from the State Government; mere recommendations by the DPC do not confer an indefeasible right to promotion, especially post-retirement.
The right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right, but there is no absolute right to promotion itself, which becomes effective only upon assumption of duties.
Promotions in public service are prospective and take effect from the date duties are assumed, not from earlier dates, emphasizing a distinction between the right to be considered for promotion and t....
Recommendations from a Departmental Promotion Committee do not confer an automatic right to promotion; formal approval by the Competent Authority is required for promotion to take effect.
Administrative delays should not adversely affect an employee's promotional prospects, allowing for notional promotions post-retirement under specific rules.
Point of Law : In case of a notional promotion from retrospective date, it cannot entitle the employee to arrears of salary as the incumbent has not worked in the promotional post.
A mere inclusion in a promotion panel does not create a vested right to promotion; candidates are entitled only to consideration for promotion within valid administrative discretion.
Promotions take effect from the date granted, not from the date of vacancy, and retrospective seniority cannot be assigned.
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
