IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
SATYEN VAIDYA, J.
Kamla Tanwar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Others - Respondents
CWPOA No. 5255 of 2019
Decided On : 28-04-2023
Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2003 - Examination - Certificate is not authentic - Declared ineligible for promotion - Respondent No.3 may be directed to place on record provisions relating to declaration of confidential/provisional result of candidates before formal declaration of result of examination - Whether review DPC was justified in reviewing recommendation of DPC in respect of promotion of petitioner to post of Lecturer - Entire premise for reviewing promotion of petitioner has been found to be incorrect – Para 14.
Finding of the Court:
Decision of review DPC in respect of petitioner was again unwarranted as recommendations of DPC in respect of petitioner had already been upheld by this Court vide judgment passed in CWP - Authenticity of certificate issued by University, in respect of petitioner had duly been considered by Court and thereafter its authenticity was upheld - That being so, review DPC had no jurisdiction to sit over judgment of Court - Recommendation made by DPC modifying recommendation of DPC in respect of petitioner are quashed and set-aside.
Result: Petition allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Satyen Vaidya, J.
By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following substantive reliefs :
“(i) That respondent No.3 may be directed to place on record the provisions relating to declaration of confidential/provisional result of the candidates before formal declaration of result of such examination.
(ii) That the recommendations of DPC held on 7.4.2015, Annexure A-9, to the extent applicant has been declared ineligible for promotion in the DPC held on 3.1.2013 may kindly be quashed and set aside and consequently promotion of applicant to the post of Lecturer, Sister Nivedita Government College of Nursing, IGMC Complex, Shimla vide order dated 10.1.2013, Annexure A-4, may be upheld with all consequential benefits, if necessary, even by review DPC dated 7.4.2015.
(iii) That if during the pendency of OA, on the basis of recommendations of DPC at Annexure A-9, respondent No.4 is promoted as Lecturer (Nursing) by excluding the applicant, in such an eventuality the promotion of respondent No.4 on the basis of DPC at Annexure A-9 may also be quashed and set aside.
(iv) That if during the pendency of OA, any interruption is caused in the service of applicant pursuant to recommendations of DPC at Annexure A-9 and if any adverse order is passed on the basis of such recommendations, such order may also be quashed and set aside and applicant may be directed to be reinstated as Lecturer Nursing with continuity in service and all consequential benefits.
(v) That in the alternative, the promotion of respondents No. 5 and 6 or any of them vide notification dated 12.12.2014, Annexure A-7, if necessary, may be quashed and set aside with a direction to the respondent department to hold review DPC and consider the applicant for promotion as Principal Nursing Officer from the date respondents No. 5 and 6 were so promoted, with all consequential benefits.”
2. The petitioner was working as Sister Tutor in Government Nursing School, IGMC Complex, Shimla, which was upgraded as Sister Nivedita Government College of Nursing (for short, ‘Nursing College’) in the year, 2010. Petitioner had been promoted as Sister Tutor from the post of Staff Nurse on 19.3.2001. In 2009, petitioner sought permission of her employer to improve her qualification and sought admission in M.Sc. Nursing in Jiwaji University, Gwalior in 2009.
3. As per the R & P Rules for the post of Lecturer in Nursing College “Sister Tutor” was feeder category for promotion to the post of Lecturer. However, possession of degree in M.Sc. Nursing with three years regular or regular combined with continuous ad-hoc service in the grade was an essential condition for being considered for promotion to the post of Lecturer.
4. On 3.1.2013, the meeting of DPC for the post of Lecturer in Nursing College was convened. Besides others, the name of petitioner was also considered. Consequently, the petitioner was promoted as Lecturer in Nursing College vide office order dated 10.1.2013.
5. Respondent No.4 assailed the promotion of petitioner as Lecturer by filing CWP No.1305 of 2013 before this Court on the ground that petitioner was not eligible to be promoted as Lecturer on the date of holding of DPC as the result of M.Sc. Nursing was declared by Jiwaji University, Gwalior on 26.2.2013 and, therefore, the petitioner was not having the essential qualification of M.Sc. Nursing either at the date of her consideration for promotion to the post of Lecturer or on the date when she was promoted to the said post. On the other hand, the petitioner had contested CWP No. 1305 of 2013 on the ground that Jiwaji University, Gwalior, at the request of petitioner, had issued letter dated 1.1.2013, whereby the provisional result of the petitioner was communicated to the Director of Health Services & Family Welfare, Himachal Pradesh and it was revealed that the applicant had passed M.Sc. Nursing (final examinations) held in June, 2012 and the marks sheet would be issued after formal declaration of result.
6. A
As per R & P Rules for post of Lecturer in Nursing College “Sister Tutor” was feeder category for promotion to post of Lecturer.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that promotions must be in accordance with the sanctioned posts and set up, as per the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and Article 226 of the Const....
Seniority is earned by an employee by his length of service in cadre and it is a valuable right of an employee and same cannot be taken away except in accordance with procedure of law.
The AICTE's clarifications dictate promotion qualifications; retrospective qualifications cannot be enforced by the State, ensuring rights of consistently employed individuals are protected.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of seniority in promotions and the obligation to consider the senior-most person for promotion before junior employees.
The legitimate claim for promotion cannot be denied based on the lack of possession of the required degree at the time of the regular Departmental Promotion Committee meeting, especially when the doc....
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.