Back
RAJESH SHANKAR
Ram Awadhesh Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the letter no. 5760 dated 24.10.2017 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition) issued by the Under Secretary, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster Management, Government of Jharkhand-respondent no. 3, whereby the claim of the petitioner regarding exemption from passing departmental examination (Accounts) has been rejected in view of the provisions contained in para nos. (2) &(4) of the letter no.4674 dated 15.05.1992 issued by the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms of the erstwhile State of Bihar. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents to pass an order of exempting the petitioner from passing the departmental examination. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to make necessary changes or correction as may be expedient after issuance of exemption order in terms with letter no.4674 dated 15.05.1992 and thereafter to make payment of arrears of pension as well as other retiral benefits on accrual of annual increments which were denied due to non-passing of the departmental examination.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Exemption from departmental examination can be granted retrospectively; discrimination against similarly situated officers violates Article 14.
The court ruled that the petitioner must comply with the new departmental examination rules for promotion, as the old rules do not apply retrospectively.
The court ruled that the Gujarat Civil Services (Conditions of Service relating to Departmental Examination) Rules, 2015 are prospective and do not apply retrospectively to petitioners, who failed to....
Employment benefits must be granted when administrative exemptions under service rules are not duly considered, ensuring procedural fairness.
The exemption from passing the departmental examination for promotion based on eligibility as of 01.09.2022 does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution, as it is a reasonable classification.
An employee cannot be penalized for the non-conduct of required examinations, and pension must be fixed based on the last drawn pay.
The court established that acceptance of appointment conditions, including language proficiency requirements, precludes later claims for exemption based on age.
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
