The Next Below Rule was applied to ensure equal opportunity for promotion, and the court directed the authorities to grant the petitioner promotion from the date when his juniors were promoted.

JUDGMENT :

N. Kotiswar Singh, J.

Heard Mr. K. Paul as well as Mr. J.P. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. B. Sarma, learned Central Government Counsel, appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

2. In this petition, the petitioner has claimed for giving the benefit of promotion from an earlier date as given to his junior officers in the grade of Second-in-Command in the Sashastra Seema Bal (in short, SSB) and other higher ranks. Though the petitioner was given promotion to the post of Second-in-Command of the SSB vide order dated 13.10.2010 he is seeking promotion w.e.f. 10.11.2009, on which date his juniors were given promotion.

3. The petitioner is also seeking consequential benefits in the next higher promotional posts. According to the petitioner, because of the belated date of promotion to the post of Second-in-Command, his promotion to the post of Commandant had been also delayed and he also seeks promotion to the post of Commandant w.e.f. 04.12.2014.

4. In view of the above claims made by the petitioner, it would be necessary to revert back to the initial appointment of the petitioner to the post of Assistant Commandant as according to the petitioner, the seniority list of the Assistant Commandants was prepared defectively which led to consequential deprivation of promotion from an earlier date. The original seniority list which was acted upon by the authorities in the grade of Assistant Commandant is to be found in Annexure-B to the writ petition, which was notified on 09.07.2001. In the said defective seniority list of Assistant Commandants, the name of the petitioner is to be found at serial No.108, whereas the names of the private respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 are to be found at serial Nos.93, 94 and 96, respectively.

5. It may be stated that the said seniority list of Assistant Commandants was put to challenge in various High Courts including the High Court of Himachal Pradesh and this Court, which interfered with the aforesaid defective seniority list and directed the authorities to revise the seniority list. Accordingly, in terms of the directions of this Court as well as the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, the authorities issued the OM dated 25.11.2011 by which the seniority list of Assistant Commandants for the year 2000 was redrawn, which was finalized vide Office Memorandum dated 22.11.2012 (Annexure-F to the writ petition). In the said redrawn seniority list, the name of the petitioner is found at Serial No.111 and the names of the other private respondents at Serial No.113, 115, 119, 122, 124 etc, thus were placed as junior to him.

6. In view of the aforesaid revision of the Seniority List in the rank of Assistant Commandant, the earlier DPC which was held for promotion to the post of Deputy Commandant prior to the revision of the select list was obviously required to be reviewed which exercise was undertaken by the authorities by holding a review DPC on 25.09.2014.

7. In order to examine whether the promotion from the post of Assistant Commandant to the post of Deputy Commandant was validly done, the following aspects are to be kept in mind:

(i) Firstly, the promotion must be based on a valid seniority list.

(ii) The prospective candidates must have fulfilled the criteria for promotion to the higher post.

Only when the aforesaid two conditions are in order, then the promotion can be said to be validly made.

8. As mentioned above, the seniority in grade of Assistant Commandant was required to be redrawn as it was found to be defective by the High Courts, which was ultimately done. In the said redrawn seniority list, the petitioner is admittedly found to be senior to the private respondents.

9. If that is so, the question that arises for consideration is whether the petitioner and the private respondents had all fulfilled the eligibility criteria for promotion to the higher post. If the petitioner an