SAMEER JAIN
Jaiveer Singh Solanki, S/o. Late Shri Chandra Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through Principal Secretary, Department of Energy, Government of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
(Sameer Jain, J.) :
1. With the consent of learned counsel for the both the sides, and looking to the urgency voiced by the petitioners, the instant petition was taken up for final disposal.
2. The petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with the following prayers, as reproduced herein-under:-
(ii) to quash and set aside order dated 13.09.2023 (Annexure-11) to the extent of promotion of Respondent No.4 passed by Respondent No.3;
(iii) to issue any other appropriate relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the Petitioners;
(iv) to allow the cost of the writ petition in favour of the Petitioners.”
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS
3. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Karan Tibrewal, submitted that the instant petition is filed being a
R.K. Sabharwal vs. State of Punjab reported in (1995) 2 SCC 745
Indra Sawney vs. Union of India reported in AIR 1993 SC 477
B.S. Gaur vs. Union of India and Ors. reported in (2001) 9 SCC 706
Union of India vs. N. Murugesan and Ors. reported in (2022) 2 SCC 25
Om Prabha Negi vs. H.P. Public Service Commission reported in (2022) 2 SCT 420 (HP)
P.N. Premachandran vs. The State of Kerala and Ors. reported in AIR 2004 SC 255
The court established that administrative lapses in conducting promotions must not prejudice employees' rights, and adherence to reservation limits is mandatory.
Promotion rights are not absolute; retrospective promotions require clear vacancies and adherence to procedural rules, which were not met in this case.
Promotion processes must adhere to established guidelines, ensuring fair consideration for all eligible candidates. Clubbing of vacancies across years violates process integrity, and resultant promot....
Promotion cannot be denied from eligibility and vacancy date merely due to departmental delay in convening DPC for clarifications; review DPC under service handbook Clause 16.29 grants notional benef....
Amended promotion rules' 45% quota for Junior Engineers with 7 years service contains no Diploma/Degree requirement; unqualified seniors eligible; DPC rejection on qualification grounds invalid.
Appointing authority cannot selectively reject DPC recommendations for eligible candidate while accepting for others without following Handbook procedure for disagreement; must ensure equal treatment....
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.