Retired employee has right to DPC consideration if in zone but no entitlement to notional or retrospective promotion post-superannuation; promotion effective only from actual grant and charge assumption, absent specific rule or mala fides.

JUDGMENT :

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.

Petitioner projects that due to pendency of a writ petition, the respondents did not convene the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for promotion to the post of Principal (College Cadre) during his service tenure. Petitioner, who was a respondent in the said writ petition superannuated in the interregnum. The writ petition was dismissed after his retirement. The respondents thereafter convened the meeting of DPC. The DPC, though considered the name of the petitioner against the vacancy for the year 2019 but did not recommend his promotion he being a retiree. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has instituted this writ petition mainly praying for conferring upon him notional promotion to the post of Principal (College Cadre) from the year 2019 when the post became available and he was also eligible for promotion.

2. The Case

2(i) Petitioner was appointed as Lecturer (Music) College Cadre on 14.08.1993. He was designated as Senior Lecturer in August, 1999 and further promoted as Associate Professor in August, 2006.

2(ii) According to the petitioner, he was eligible for promotion as Principal (College Cadre) during the year 2018. Petitioner satisfied the eligibility criteria for promotion and was also in possession of Ph.D Degree in Music. His name was reflected at Sr. No.1 in the list of eligible candidates as per seniority. The DPC for promotion to the post of Principal (College Cadre) was not convened.

2(iii) Some incumbents possessing Ph.D Degrees but junior to the petitioner in the seniority list instituted Dr. Sanjeev Kumar & Ors. versus State of H.P. & Ors., CWPOA No. 4373 of 2019, decided on 23.06.2022. Present petitioner was impleaded as respondent No.6 therein. In the said writ petition, the claim was that only Ph.D Degree holders and not M.Phil Degree holders should be considered for promotion as Principal (College Cadre), as per UGC guidelines. It is the projected case of the petitioner that because of pendency of the said writ petition, respondents did not convene the meeting of DPC, consequently, petitioner was deprived of his promotion despite being eligible.

2(iv) The writ petition was dismissed on 23.06.2022. The respondents, thereafter convened the meeting of DPC on 18.08.2023. The name of the petitioner, who had superannuated in the meanwhile on 31.03.2022 was also considered and it figured at Sr. No.1 of the panel prepared for the year 2019. Petitioner being a retiree was however not actually promoted as Principal (College Cadre).

2(v) With the grievance that it was not petitioner’s fault that the meeting of DPC was not convened in time; That it was because of pendency of Dr. Sanjeev Kumar[CWPOA No. 4373 of 2019, decided on 23.06.2022], the respondents had not convened the meeting of DPC, the petitioner has instituted this petition praying that his superannuation during pendency of the writ petition cannot be held against him for not promoting him to the post of Principal (College Cadre); That in view of instructions issued by the State Personnel Department on 25.06.2013, petitioner was required to be conferred at least notional promotion w.e.f. year 2019, when he was fully eligible and post for his promotion was also available. The substantive reliefs prayed for by the petitioner read as under:

(i) To quash the proceedings of the DPC dated 18.8.2023 qua the petitioner for not including his name in the selection panel dated 18.8.2023 without any rhyme and reason despite being fully eligible and qualified in all respects and reflected at Sr. No.1 in the list of eli- gible and found fit candidates against the vacancies for the year 2019 (Annexure P-2 at page 22) with fur- ther directions to the respondents to grant promotion on noti