The right to be considered for promotion is fundamental, but there is no absolute right to promotion itself; promotions are effective only upon assuming duties.

JUDGMENT :

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.

Notice. Mr. Deepak Sharma, learned Counsel, accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. More than five years after his retirement, petitioner has instituted this writ petition with the grievance that he was eligible for promotion to the post of Sub Inspector and was wrongly deprived of his legitimate right to be promoted as Sub Inspector. Petitioner seeks direction to the respondents-Corporation to promote him as Sub Inspectorfrom the due date alongwtih all consequential benefits including interest thereupon.

3. The case set up is that the petitioner joined the respondent-Corporation on 07.11.1990. He retired as Conductor from the respondent-Corporation on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.10.2019. Petitioner claims that he was considered for promotion to the post of Sub- Inspector in the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee convened on 09.07.2019; His name figured at Sr. No. 22 of the waiting panel of the Scheduled Caste Category; Petitioner, however, was not promoted as Sub Inspector and he superannuated on 31.10.2019. Petitioner made a representation to the respondent on 30.12.2021 to confer him the benefits of promotion to the post of Sub Inspector from due date. The respondents, however, have not obliged. Hence, this writ petition.

4 At this juncture, it will be appropriate to refer to Government of West Bengal & Ors. vs. Dr. Amal Satpathi & Ors., Civil Appeal No.13187 of 2024 decided on 27.11.2024., whereunder it was held that employee whose promotion was not effectuated before his retirement wouldnot be entitled to retrospective promotion and the notional benefits attached to the promotion.

In the aforesaid case, learned Tribunal had acknowledged that respondent No.1 (therein) had been duly recommended for promotion before his superannuation, which was delayed due to procedural obstructions beyond his control. Therefore, while actual promotion was not acceded to, the learned Tribunal directed that respondent No.1 should be granted notional financial benefits of promotional post to ensure pensionary benefits commensurate with the promotional post. The order passed by learned Tribunal was assailed by appellant before Hon’ble High Court. The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the writ petition, concurring with the learned Tribunal that retrospective promotion was impermissible but the notional financial benefits were justifiably given, since, no fault could be attributed to respondent No.1.

The State assailed the aforesaid decision before the Hon’ble Apex Court. Appellant-State relied upon several pronouncements, including Union of India vs. N.C. Murali, (2017) 13 SCC 575 to contend that without a specific rule entitling employees to promotion from the date of vacancy, right to promotion arises only when it is actually effected. Whereas, submission on behalf of respondent No.1 was that he could have been promoted to post of Chief Scientific Officer years earlier; had the Department submitted a timely proposal to fill up the vacancy, had the Department officials acted with promptitude and diligence, respondent No.1 would have in all probability received the promotion long before his retirement.

Hon’ble Apex Court, inter alia, noticed Rule 54(1)(a) of the West Bengal Service Rules and reiterated well- settled principle that promotion becomes effective from the date it is granted, rather than from the date a vacancy arises or the post is created. There is only right to be considered for promotion, there is no fundamental right to the promotion itself. No retrospective promotion can be granted nor can any seniority be given on retrospective basis from a date when an employee has not even been borne in the cadre. Relevant paras from the decision are as under:-

“19. It is a well settled principle that promotion becomes effective from the date it is granted, rather than from the date a vacancy arises or the post is created. While the Courts have recognized the right to be considered