Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
DEEPAK ROSHAN
Pradip Prasad S/o Late Gajanan – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the Respondent-State of Jharkhand to grant promotion to the petitioner to the post of Deputy Secretary with effect from 24.6.2013 and further to the post of Joint Secretary with effect from 27.7.2018. The petitioner has also prayed for the grant of all consequential benefits.
In addition to the above, the petitioner prays that the notification dated 3.10.2019 (Annexure-7) and the notification dated 17.11.2020 (Annexure-8), by which he has been granted notional promotion to the post of Additional Collector/Deputy Secretary and to the post of Joint Secretary, respectively, be quashed as they suffer from gross illegality and arbitrariness.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner, after qualifying for the 37th Bihar Public Service Examination, joined service in the year 1993. After the bifurcation of the State of Bihar, the petitioner was allotted the Jharkhand cadre, and he joined his services in the State of Jharkhand in 2003. The otherwise unblemished career of the petitioner was adversely
Quashing of punishment has retrospective effect; employee gets promotion and financial benefits from juniors' promotion dates when delay due to employer's fault; 'no work no pay' inapplicable; incomp....
Promotion benefits must be provided retrospectively if employees are faultless for the delay; state errors cannot obstruct rightful claims.
Promotion cannot be denied solely based on the number of past punishments without considering their nature and timing, ensuring equal treatment under Article 14.
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 decisions must adhere to principles of natural justice, including adequate communication of requirements; discriminatory practices violate constitutional rights.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right, and seniority cannot be granted retrospectively when an employee was not born....
The right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right, and the order of punishment imposed against the petitioner did not comply with the requirements of G.O.Ms.No.342, dated 04.08.1997.
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
