SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 14876

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, J
Suresh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Indian Council of Agricultural Research – Respondent
O.A. No.060/984/2023|O.A. No.060/987/2023|O.A. No.060/989/2023|O.A. No.060/988/2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sh. A.K. Bhardwaj
For the Respondents: Sh. R.K. Sharma

A promotion cannot be reversed after many years of service without misrepresentation; qualifications recognized at the time of promotion must be honored under the principle of administrative fairness.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Promotion and eligibility under Technical Service Rules (TSR) - Applicants claimed reinstatement of promotions to T-3 & higher grades based on their qualifications and challenged subsequent show cause notices and revisions of promotion dates - The Tribunal quashed the impugned order denying promotions based on qualification equivalence, noting past precedents that promotion cannot be revoked retrospectively after long service. (Paras 1, 20, 43)

(B) Qualifications and promotional eligibility - TSR amended qualifications state a Bachelor's degree in Agriculture or equivalent is required for promotion to T-3 - Retrospection of promotions after a significant time period without misrepresentation is unjust and harms careers - The notion that qualifications from old rules can be dismissed after years of service lacks sincerity. (Paras 35, 41)

(C) Legal precedence - Previous judgments support that employees cannot be penalized for administrative errors regarding promotions; revocation of long-held positions due to misinterpretation of rules is impermissible. (Paras 22, 42)

Facts of the case:
The applicants, employed as Technical Officers, challenged orders retracting their promotions based on qualifications from the Technical Service Rules, asserting that their educational certifications were recognized as equivalent at the time of initial promotion. (Paras 2, 9, 30)

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the applicants' positions, ruling prior promotions should not be revoked, concluding this would cause irreparable harm to their careers.

Issues: The main questions were the legality of revoking promotions based on changed interpretations of qualifications and long-standing administrative practices.

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal emphasized that the passage of time and reliance on qualifications for promotions necessitate keeping those promotions intact, as retroactive decisions undermine staff morale and trust.

Result: Original Applications dismissed; no recovery of monetary benefits already availed.

ORDER

Per: SH. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR MEMBER (J):

1. All the above four Original Applications are taken up together for disposal, as a common question of law and facts are involved in all these cases. With the consent of learned counsels for the parties, the facts are being extracted from O.A.No.060/984/2023 (Suresh Kumar Vs. UOI & Ors.) and the said case has been treated as a lead case.

2. The present Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, seeking the following relief(s):-

i. Order dated 14/15/09.2023 (Annexure A-1) read with OM dated 14.09.2023/ 15.09.2023 (Annexure A- 26) passed during the pendency of Original Application No. 869 of 2023 in which stay on the passing of any such order was prayed for and notice was already issued, be quashed. In the impugned order the promotion order dated 30.08.2012 has been withdrawn and promotion date of the applicant has been revised after more than 11 Years.

ii. Letter dated 22.08.2023 (Annexure A-1/A) vide which, in the light of earlier letter dated 25.11.2020 (Annexure A-2), respondent No.1 has treated the promotion of the applicant as T-3 by removing of category bar, not in accordance with the provisions of Technical Service Rules and has directed respondent No.2 to take corrective measures for the same, be quashed.

iii. Show cause notice dated 23/24.08.2023 (Annexure A-3) issued 3 years of issuing the identical show cause notice (Annexure A-4) which was duly replied by all the applicant and which is issued after more than 10 years of their promotion orders, vide which the applicant has been directed to show cause as to why they may not be reverted as per the their qualification be quashed.

iv. Directions be issued to the respondents to keep the promotions granted to the applicant after removal of category bar intact, the same been granted after thorough consultation and discussion by high level committee regarding the qualifications of the applicant and further for the reason that there being no misrepresentation at any stage by the applicant and further to grant them further promotion to T-6 (Category-III) from the date it became due.

v. Process initiated on letter dated 22.08.2023 and show cause notice dated 23/24.08.2023 be stayed and directions be issued to the respondents to not to revert the applicant till the pendency of the present Original Application.”

3. The facts as taken out from OA No. 060/984/2023 are that the applicant was appointed as Field Farm Technicians (T-1). All the technical employees under the respondents are governed by Technical Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as TSR). The Technical Service Rules were original framed in the year 1975 and came into force w.e.f. 01.10.1975. Later on, the said rules were modified on 03.02.2000. As per Clause 3.1 of the TSR, the Technical Services are grouped into three categories i.e. Category-I, Category-II and Category-III consisting of different grades with scales of pay as adopted by the ICAR on the basis of recommendations made by IV and V Central Pay Commission. That Rule 6.1 of the Technical Service Rules, 1975 deals with Career Advancement and the same is reproduced as under:-

"Rule 6.1: There shall be system of merit promotion from one grade to next higher grade irrespective of occurrence of vacancies in higher grade or grant of advance increment (s) in the same grade, on the basis of assessment of performance. The persons concerned will be eligible consideration for such promotion or for the grant of advance increment (s) after the expiry of the number of prescribed years of service in the grade as detailed in the succeeding paras”.

4. That as per Rule 6.3, the entrants of Category I at T- 1 grade would continue to be regulated for assessment from T-l to T-2 after five years of service, as at present. However, the T-2 grade personnel, possessing the qualifications, as prescribed herein further under the Notification of 3 February 2000 for Category II for direct rec

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top