Promotion eligibility requires fulfillment of specific conditions at retirement; mere vacancy does not confer entitlement to retrospective promotion.

ORDER

Hon’ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A)

In the present Original Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, the applicant has sought for the following reliefs:-

“8.1 to allow the OA and quash the Minutes of DPC dated 07.05.2003 received under letter in F No. LHMC/RTI/ Admn.-I/2015/6550 dated 17.09.2015 (Ann. A-1); and consequently

8.2 direct the respondents to convene review DPC for the purpose of promotion to the post of Office Superintendent pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 and consider the case of petitioner and the promotion to the petitioner be released with all consequential benefits of pay and allowance and revision in pensionary benefits with arrears also along-with interest there on @ 18% p.a. thereon;

8.2 to grant any other or further appropriate relief as deemed just and proper by this Hon'ble Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case besides cost of present litigation to the extent of Rs.55,000/-.”

2. Brief facts of the case as narrated by learned counsel for the applicant are as under:-

2.1 The applicant was initially appointed as Lower Division Clerk on 29.09.1962 and thereafter promoted as Upper Division Clerk in the year 1984 and then as Head Clerk w.e.f. 06.12.1996 in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000. As per the RRs, his next promotion to the post of Office Superintendent on completion of five years service as Head Clerk became due in December, 2001, subject to availability of vacancy.

2.2 According to the applicant, the DPC should have been convened in April-May 2002 in terms of DoPT’s OM No. 22011/5/86-Estt.(D) dated 10.04.1989 as amended by OM Nos. 22011/5/91-Estt.(D) dated 27.03.1997 and No. 22011/4/98-Estt.(D) dated 12.10.1998 inasmuch as two posts of Office Superintendent occurred in May, 2002 and August, 2002 on superannuation of two incumbents, viz. Mr. B.L. Gupta and Mr. Ram Phal, respectively. The applicant made a request for his promotion vide letter dated 07.06.2002.

2.3 Vide letter dated 26.09.2002 (Annexure A-4), the Competent Authority granted approval for promotion of one Smt. Darshan and the applicant on ad hoc basis. However, in supersession of the above letter, another order was passed on 04.10.2002 approving promotion of the applicant subject to DPC. In the meanwhile, the applicant retired from service on 30.09.2002 on attaining the age of superannuation, without promotion to the post of Office Superintendent despite approval of the Competent Authority.

2.4 Thereafter, the applicant made repeated representations to the respondent No.3 till 2007 for his promotion from the retrospective date, in implementation of the order dated 26.09.2002 and, thereafter, made a number of visits to the office during 2008 to 2014, but he was not apprised with anything at all.

2.5 On 17.09.2015, in response to the information sought under RTI vide application dated 06.08.2015, he was provided with the minutes of DPC held on 07.05.2003, wherein it was observed by the DPC that since the applicant has retired, the request for promotion as Office Superintendent with retrospective date may not be considered at this stage.

2.6 Thereafter, he also submitted a petition to the President of India for getting the injustice undone, followed by reminders, but to no avail. Hence, this O.A.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that when the vacancy exists and the employee fulfils requisite regular service/experience and other eligibility conditions as per the RRs, though right of promotion is not a fundamental right but right of consideration for promotion is his fundamental right as per the settled position of law. He also referred to the DoPT guidelines issu