Back
DEEPAK ROSHAN
Krishna Murari – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners praying therein for quashing of that part of the notification as contained in memo No. 122 dated 21.01.2015, issued by the respondent no. 2; whereby the monetary benefit for the promotional post and scale has been given with effect from the date of notification i.e. 21.01.2015 though promotion to the senior selection grade was given w.e.f. 31.01.1997 and in super selection grade w.e.f. 31.01.2002 in respect to petitioner no. 1 to 4. So far as petitioner no. 5 is concerned; senior selection grade was given w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and super selection grade w.e.f. 01.01.2001.
The petitioner further prays for a direction upon the respondents to pay the scale of promotional post w.e.f. the date of their actual date of promotion at the revised scale and to pay the difference of arrears of salary to the petitioners from the date of actual promotion.
3. The brief fact of the case as disclosed in the instant writ application is that the petitioners are Associate Professor in different departments at B.I.T. Sindri, Dhanbad. The petitioner no. 1 to 3 and 5 are stil
Promotional benefits must be granted from the actual date of promotion, not from the date of notification, ensuring equal treatment for similarly situated employees.
Promotion benefits must be provided retrospectively if employees are faultless for the delay; state errors cannot obstruct rightful claims.
Promotions cannot be annulled without an adverse order from prior litigation, reaffirming principles of legal continuity and procedural fairness.
Petitioner entitled to retrospective benefits from promotion date due to having performed duties in the post, despite retirement status; denial of benefits ruled arbitrary.
(1) Promotion – Promotion only becomes effective upon assumption of duties on promotional post and not on the date of occurrence of vacancy or the date of recommendation – Right to be considered for ....
The AICTE's clarifications dictate promotion qualifications; retrospective qualifications cannot be enforced by the State, ensuring rights of consistently employed individuals are protected.
The denial of pay scale benefits to petitioners after 18 years of service is unjustified; they are entitled to the pay scale of Sub-Inspector as per M.T. Cadre.
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
