Back
2025 Supreme(HP) 126
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JYOTSNA REWAL DUA, J.
Muneesh Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. & Ors. - Respondents
CWP No.12140 of 2024
Decided on : 01-05-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Dilip Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manish Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General.
An employee's promotion option is not irrevocable if the promotion is not accepted, allowing for reconsideration for other available channels.
Headnote:
(A) Promotion - Instructions regarding promotion for posts with multiple channels - The petitioner, having exercised an option for promotion to the post of Assistant Public Relation Officer (APRO) but not having assumed the duties, is entitled to reconsideration for promotion to Superintendent Grade-II. The circular dated 03.12.2014 states that options are final and irrevocable only upon assumption of duties. (Paras 2, 4, 5)
(B) Legal Principle - An employee's option for promotion is not binding if the promotion is not accepted, allowing for a fresh option for other available channels. (Paras 4(i), 4(ii))
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, initially promoted to Senior Assistant, opted for promotion to APRO but did not join the post due to personal reasons, leading to a dispute over his eligibility for promotion to Superintendent Grade-II.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner’s previous option did not materialize as he did not assume the duties of APRO, thus allowing him to exercise a fresh option for promotion.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner could withdraw his option for APRO promotion and seek promotion to Superintendent Grade-II after not assuming the duties of APRO.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the option for promotion is not irrevocable if the promotion is not accepted, emphasizing the need for flexibility in promotion options.
Result: The impugned decision was quashed, allowing the petitioner to opt for both promotional channels.
JUDGMENT :
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.
The petitioner is holding a post from which more than one channel of promotion is available. He currently desires promotion through one specific channel. The respondents have declined his request on the ground that he had previously opted for another channel of promotion, was also promoted as such, but had forgone his promotion on that channel, therefore, he now cannot claim promotion through another channel. Hence, the dispute.
2. Following facts are not in dispute.
2(i). Petitioner joined as Clerk on 01.09.1997 on his appointment on compassionate ground. In the year 2002, he Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes was placed as Junior Assistant and promoted as Senior Assistant in June, 2016. He joined as Senior Assistant on 23.07.2016.
2(ii). Post of Senior Assistant held by the petitioner is feeder channel for promotion to the post of (i) Superintendent Grade-II and (ii) Assistant Public Relation Officer (‘APRO’). Department of Personnel of State of Himachal Pradesh has issued a circular on 03.12.2014 on the subject of inviting options for promotions from the post having more than one channel. The contents of this circular are extracted hereinafter: -
“Subject: Promotion in respect of posts having more than one channel- instructions regarding.
Sir, I am directed to invite your attention to the subject cited above and to say that the matter of promotion in respect of the posts having more than one channel was under consideration of the State Government. After considering and in supersession of this Department's letter No. Per (AP-II) A (3)-4/78 dated 24-12-1981 and letter of even number dated 1st September, 2010, it has been decided that henceforth in the case of posts having more than one channels of promotion from the feeder posts(s) to the next higher posts), the following procedure will be adopted:- (i) For the post having more than one promotional channel, the option will invariably be called for in every calendar year and officers/officials in zone of consideration and holding the feeder post will have to opt for one of the channels of promotion of his/her choice, which shall be final and irrevocable.
(ii) Once a candidate is promoted as per the option exercised, such candidate will neither be entitled for consideration for promotion in the other channel nor will be allowed to withdraw the option, so exercised and his/her option shall be treated as final and irrevocable for entire service career.
2. These instructions may be brought to the notice of all concerned for strict compliance and the receipt of the same may also be acknowledged. Any departure from these instructions will be viewed seriously and liable for disciplinary action.”
2(iii). On 28.05.2021 (Annexure P-1), respondent No.2- Director, Information & Public Relations, Shimla, sought option from the petitioner and others eligible for promotion to the post of APRO. On 01.06.2021, the petitioner furnished his option for promotion to the post of APRO, which, inter alia, recited ‘the petitioner understood that in case of promotion to the post of APRO, he will lose his claim for promotion to the post of Personal Assistant/Superintendent Grade-II. The option exercised by the petitioner shall be treated as final.’
Although the petitioner had opted for promotion to the post of APRO, he was not promoted as available vacancy was filled in by promotion of a candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste category.
2(iv). On availability of more posts of APRO, the respondent-Department once again called for option from the petitioner and others for promotion to the post of APRO on 29.04.2022 (Annexure P-3). The petitioner opted for promotion to the post of APRO with the understanding that, upon such promotion, he would lose his claim to promotion to the post of Personal Assistant/Superintendent Grade-II, and that the option once exercised by him would be final and irrevocable.
On the basis of the petitioner’s aforesaid optio
