Back
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Om Pal – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been filed challenging order dated 11.10.2017 (Annexure P-5) by which, though the petitioner has been granted promotion retrospectively from the date, persons junior to the petitioner were promoted but the arrears of salary have been denied on the ground that the petitioner had not actually discharged the duties on the said promoted post.
2. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner argues that in the present case, the petitioner who was working as a Patwari was entitled for promotion to the post of Kanungo as he had already attained the eligibility for promotion to the post of Kanungo by passing the departmental examination on 25.05.2012. One Akhtar Hussain, who also passed the departmental examination along with the petitioner and was junior to the petitioner, was promoted as a Kanungo on 09.10.2012 but the petitioner was not given promotion on the ground that ACRs of the petitioner were not received by the department.
3. Aggrieved of the said action of the respondents, the petitioner filed CWP No.15466 of 2017 which was disposed of by this Court on 19.07.2017 directing the respondents to con
An employee denied promotion due to administrative errors is entitled to retrospective promotion and benefits once exonerated from charges.
Point of Law : In case of a notional promotion from retrospective date, it cannot entitle the employee to arrears of salary as the incumbent has not worked in the promotional post.
Denial of financial benefits upon notional promotion due to procedural lapses violates principles of natural justice; similarly situated employees must be treated equally.
Promotions may be granted retrospectively with salary when administrative delays occur due to no fault of the employee, avoiding disparate treatment based on administrative negligence.
Claims regarding promotions may be denied due to inordinate delays unless they involve continuing wrongs impacting rights, limiting arrears recovery.
Promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right; eligibility does not guarantee promotion without evidence of junior promotions.
The court affirmed that a petitioner is entitled to monetary benefits from the date of filing a promotion petition, following established legal principles.
The claim for promotion is not a right and the promotions are to be made at the discretion of the employer as and when the employer feels the requirement of the same.
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
