Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 10979
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Manish Garg, J, Dr. Anand S Khati, A
Taruna – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
O.A. No.3291/2016
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Jitender Kumar Singh
For the Respondents: Mr. Avinish Ahlawat
The denial of promotional avenues for employees over several decades violates their rights under constitutional provisions, necessitating immediate restructuring of recruitment rules.
Headnote:(A) Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 - Sections pertaining to Administrative Tribunal's jurisdiction - Denial of promotional avenues and career progression - The applicants, employees of Delhi Technological University, contested denial of promotions for 20-24 years due to stagnant recruitment rules, which failed to create promotional paths. The tribunal emphasized the necessity for timely restructuring and amendments to rules to ensure career growth. (Paras 5.1 and 5.2)
(B) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16 - Arbitrary denial of promotions constitutes a violation of employee rights.
Facts of the case:
The applicants are library staff who have stagnated in their roles for decades without promotional opportunities, despite existing vacancies for higher posts. They claimed violations of their rights stemming from inactivity regarding recruitment rule amendments.
Findings of Court:
The tribunal directed the respondents to urgently amend the recruitment rules and consider eligible applicants for promotions to the post of Assistant Librarian, specifying a three-month timeframe for action.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the prolonged denial of promotional avenues amounts to a legal violation under Articles 14 and 16.
Ratio Decidendi: The right to promotion is integral to service conditions, and failure to create promotional paths leads to arbitrariness, breaching constitutional guarantees.
Result: Original Application disposed with directions for restructuring and rule amendments within three months.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. denial of promotions for decades. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments against stagnation and lack of recruitment rules. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court's findings on necessity for amendments. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. directive for restructuring and timely amendments. (Para 6) |
ORDER By Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Narrating the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted as under:-
1.1. The applicants are Library Staff working in the Central Library of the respondent Institute, i.e., Delhi Technological University (DTU). They have been stagnating on the post of Counter Assistant for the last 20–24 years without any promotional avenues or career growth, despite the existence of vacancies since 2002 on the next higher post of Assistant Librarian. The continued inaction on the part of the respondent Institute has resulted in denial of due promotions to the applicants.
1.2. The applicants have been continuously representing for amendment of the Recruitment Rules of the Library Staff structure. However, the respondent Institute has remained indifferent to their plight and no proper steps have been taken to redress their grievances. The applicants have also not been extended the benefits of the 4th and 5th Central Pay Commissions, nor have they been granted proportionate grade pay. It is further submitted that vide Office Memorandum dated 24.07.1990, the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, revised the Library Staff structure and their pay scales. The said O.M. was also endorsed by the Government of NCT of Delhi, and several Ministries, Departments and Autonomous Bodies have already implemented the same. However, the erstwhile Delhi College of Engineering administration, and subsequently DTU, remained reticent, thereby depriving the applicants of these benefits.
1.3. Applicant No.1, Smt. Rampati Nain, initially joined as Library Attendant on 24.10.1991 and was later promoted as Counter Assistant. Applicant No.2, Smt. Taruna Arora, joined as Counter Assistant in February 1992 and has been serving continuously on the same post for the last more than 24 years. She became eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian as early as May 1998. Applicant No.3, Smt. Neeru Mallik, joined the respondent Institute on 09.09.1994 as Library Attendant and was promoted as Counter Assistant in January 2004. Despite being fully qualified and despite the existence of vacancies, none of the applicants have been granted promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian.
1.4 In the Central Library, two posts of Assistant Librarian have been lying vacant since 2002, and in 2005, five posts of Assistant Librarian were created. However, instead of promoting eligible departmental candidates, the respondent Institute filled such posts on contractual basis, citing absence of Recruitment Rules as the reason for not granting promotions. The fact remains that even after repeated representations, no Recruitment Rules have been framed/amended to provide promotional avenues to Counter Assistants. At present, three posts of Assistant Librarian are lying vacant, while two are being manned on contractual basis.
1.5 It is further submitted that though the respondent Institute, vide letter dated 26.06.2009, indicated that it was in the process of restructuring the Library Staff cadre, and vide communication dated 20.12.2011 informed the applicants that a Committee had been constituted to examine the issue, till date no concrete steps have been taken. Even subsequent representations in 2016 failed to yield any result. 1.6. The existing Recruitment Rules of the respondent Institute are flawed inasmuch as they provide promotional avenues from Assistant Librarian to the next higher post, but no channel has been prescribed for promotion from Counter Assistant to Assistant Librarian. This has resulted in stagnation of the applicants for the last 20–24 years without any career progression.
1.7 It is further submitted that the applicants have also been denied the ben
