Qualification and work experience required for promotion under the C.G. Municipal Corporation Rules are distinct; eligibility is based on total service in the feeder cadre, and refusal of promotion for one specific post does not disqualify an employee from future consideration for a different promotional post.

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PARTH PRATEEM SAHU

Order on Board

16/04/2026

1. Petitioner aggrieved with his non-consideration of his name for promotion on the post of Assistant Accounts Officer from the post of Assistant Grade II by the Departmental Promotion Committee has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs;

“10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/writs/ direction/directions, in the nature of certiorari to set aside the impugned promotion order dated 17.01.2025 with respect to respondent no. 3 to 5 (Annexure-P/1).

10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/writs/ direction/directions, in the nature of certiorari and direct the respondent/Municipal Corporation to grant promotion to the petitioner on the post of Assistant Account Officer and kindly may further issued direction to consider the case of petitioner on the post of Assistant Account Officer.

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is holding the post of AG-II and have completed 5 years of service on the said post. He is also having the qualification of the Accounts Training from the Government Accounts Training School. Service of the petitioner is governed by the C.G. Municipal Corporation (Appointment and Terms and Conditions of Officers and Employees) Rules 2018. Referring to Rule 11 of the rules, it is submitted that promotion of employees of Municipal Corporation is to be considered according to Schedule IV appended to Rule 11 . He contended that in the rules of 2018, initially there was no provision for promotion of the Assistant Grade II to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer. It was subsequently brought in by way of amendment dated 25.01.2021, making amendment to Serial No. 18 of Schedule IV and in Column No. 3, for the word and symbols ‘Accountant/Grade II’ has been inserted. Accordingly, petitioner being the Assistant Grade II with the qualification of the Accounts Training became eligible for his promotion on the post of Assistant Accounts Officer. It is also submission of counsel for the petitioner that as petitioner being the Accounts Trained wants to join the accounts wing and therefore have forego his promotion in the year 2024 to the post of Assistant Grade-I. Subsequent to the proceedings of the promotion of the Assistant Grade-I, the respondent department has initiated the proceedings for promotion of the Accountant/ AG-II to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer, however, the DPC which was convened on 14.01.2025 have not considered the name of the petitioners for promotion though according to the Rules of 2018, he was eligible. The private respondents who have been promoted vide Order dated 17.01.2025 are junior to the petitioner as they have joined services after the petitioner. The non-consideration of the name of the petitioner for promotion is in contravention of the Rules of 20118 and therefore, the DPC proceedings is to be set aside. Consequently, the order of promotion be quashed.

3. Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 and 2 would vehemently oppose the submission of counsel for the petitioner would submit that on the date of the initiation of the proceedings for promotion to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer petitioner was not eligible for consideration as he was not possessed with the re