Back
RAJESH SHANKAR
Gulab Peter Surein – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the office order as contained in memo no.850 dated 26th December, 2019 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent no.4, whereby the promotion granted to the petitioner on the post of “Tracer” in the year 1994 has arbitrarily been cancelled after lapse of about eight years of his retirement and it has further been ordered that his pay scale should be modified as per his original post of Chainman as well as steps be taken for modification in his pension.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similar orders dated 26th December, 2019 issued by the respondent no.4 have already been set aside by a Bench of this Court in W.P.(S) No.298 of 2020 (Arun Kumar Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and W.P.(S) no.770 of 2020 (Umesh Kumar Thakur Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.). Learned counsel for the petitioner also produces copies of the orders dated 17th October, 2020 passed in the aforesaid writ petitions.
3. On perusal of the order dated 17th October, 2020 passed in W.P.(S) 298 of 2020, it appears that the petitioner of the said case had challenged the office order dated 26th Dece
The court upheld the principle that a petitioner is entitled to the benefits of a promotion as per previous orders and should not be deprived of such benefits, especially after retirement.
The promotions of the petitioners were in conformity with the Rules of 1989, and the objections raised by the State were not valid.
Promotions cannot be annulled without an adverse order from prior litigation, reaffirming principles of legal continuity and procedural fairness.
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
