Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.M.MANOJ
Ratheesh Chandran R. – Appellant
Versus
Indian Railway Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks promotion to dgm. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner claims entitlement based on performance. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. promotion delayed due to disciplinary actions. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. allegations of disproportionate punishment. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. promotion policy allows discretion based on conduct. (Para 14 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. denial of promotion not a penalty. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 7. legal precedent supports denial of promotion during penalty. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 8. promotion consideration must follow policy. (Para 27 , 28) |
| 9. court finds no grounds to interfere with decision. (Para 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The writ petition has been filed by a person seeking promotion to the post of Deputy General Manager, challenging Exts. P14, P16, P19, P22 and P24. He further seeks a direction to the respondents to promote him to the post of Deputy General Manager (Tourism) in accordance with Ext. P1 Promotion Policy against one of the vacancies that existed as on 09.03.2012 and thereafter to promote him as General Manager with effect from 09.03.2015. He also seeks consequential benefits, including monetary benefits.
3. It is contended that, as per the Promotion Policy p
Promotion under the IRCTC policy requires absence of disciplinary penalties; denial of promotion is a natural consequence, not a penalty itself.
Service Law - Non- implementation of order of promotion - Appointments of officers are subject to DAR/Vigilance/ Criminal case clearance by Railways - Officers should be advised that above officiatin....
The right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right, and the order of punishment imposed against the petitioner did not comply with the requirements of G.O.Ms.No.342, dated 04.08.1997.
Imposition of a minor penalty of censure does not justify blocking consideration for promotion for three years under the sealed cover procedure.
Promotion in non-selection posts must adhere to seniority without subjective merit evaluations in the absence of unsuitability, reinforcing equality rights under the Constitution.
The right to consideration for promotion is a fundamental right, and after punishment for misconduct, the course available is to refer the matter before the Departmental Promotion Committee to determ....
Promotion upon assumption of duties validly contingent upon completion of disciplinary proceedings; no vested rights to promotion established.
Selection Committees must not use sealed cover procedures for promotion unless formal charges are framed against an employee, preserving rights to promotion.
The court emphasized that the denial of arrears of pay and notional promotion must be based on valid reasons and compliance with court orders is mandatory.
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
