Back
DINESH MEHTA
Puna Ram S/o Shri Bhoma Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through its Secretary Department of Ground Water, Jaipur – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Dinesh Mehta, J.
1. By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed that seniority list dated 27.02.1996 issued by the respondents be declared illegal; a direction to the respondents to accord him promotion on the post of Assistant Engineer (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AEN’) has also been sought with an assertion that his case was not considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘DPC’), when candidature of other persons of feeder cadre was considered as per said seniority list.
2. The facts appertain to be noticed are that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Pump Mechanic on 29.04.1969 and his services were confirmed vide order dated 08.05.1980, while making such confirmation/regularization effective from 27.12.1973.
3. Despite the fact that petitioner’s appointment was confirmed on the post of Pump Mechanic, the respondents had not considered his proficiency certificate equivalent to Diploma in Mechinal Engineering for which, he filed a writ petition (being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.513/1985), which came to be allowed by the High Court vide judgment dated 18.01.1995.
4. Pursuant to the above referred order, the petit
The court ruled that promotions cannot be indefinitely treated as ad-hoc, affirming the need for regularization and proper consideration for further promotions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the seniority of an employee in a promotion process should be considered in accordance with the relevant regulations, and any denial of rightf....
Promotions take effect from the date granted, not from the date of vacancy, and retrospective seniority cannot be assigned.
Promotion decisions must adhere to established seniority lists to avoid arbitrary actions violating principles of natural justice.
The court emphasized that denial of promotion based on fabricated charges violates administrative fairness and ignored prescribed ratio guidelines for promotions.
General category candidates senior in feeder cadre regain inter se seniority over earlier promoted reserved category roster-point promotees in higher cadre via catch-up rule, absent rules for consequ....
Point of Law : 10. Court should not embark upon on and enquiry into the merits of the case and that writ petition should be dismissed on the ground of laches alone.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that seniority as an Executive Engineer (Civil) should be counted from the date the individual was actually borne in the cadre, and that while prom....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the seniority of an employee should be counted from the date they were actually borne in the cadre, and while promotion is an individual right....
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
