Seniority cannot be claimed from the date of an initial promotion order if that order was subsequently cancelled due to irregularities and discrepancies in the selection or promotion process.

Order on Board

Digitally signed by SOURABH S BO HU ILR WA AB RHB DH atI eL :WAR NAFR 2026.06.27 12:22:13 +0530

1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners seek quashment of the order dated 14.01.2022 (Annexure P-7) passed by respondent No.3 and further seek a direction to the respondent authorities to reckon their seniority on the post of Headmaster (Middle School) from the date of their first promotion order dated 07.09.2012.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by the rejection of their claim for grant of seniority on the post of Headmaster (Middle School) from the date of their initial promotion order dated 07.09.2012. He submits that though the petitioners were initially promoted vide order dated 07.09.2012 and had also joined at their respective places of posting, the said promotion was subsequently interfered with and later fresh promotion orders were issued. It is contended that similarly situated employees have been granted seniority from the date of their initial promotion; however, the claim of the petitioners has been arbitrarily rejected by respondent No.3 without properly considering the relevant facts and material available on record, including the opinion of respondent No.7. He, therefore, prays that the petitioners be granted seniority from the date of their earlier promotion order dated 07.09.2012 and the impugned rejection order be set aside.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the State, by referring to paragraph 6 of the reply, submits that though the petitioners were initially promoted vide order dated 07.09.2012, the Commissioner, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe Development Department had issued directions to the Collector, Surajpur to enquire into certain discrepancies in the said promotions. Pursuant thereto, the earlier promotion order dated 07.09.2012 was cancelled vide order dated 21.09.2012 on account of irregularities and discrepancies noticed therein. He submits that thereafter the petitioners were subsequently promoted as Headmasters vide order dated 19.09.2013 and, therefore, they cannot claim seniority from the earlier cancelled promotion order dated 07.09.2012. He submits that the action of the State authorities is just, proper and in accordance with law.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings as well as the documents appended with the writ petition.

5. The petitioners are essentially claiming seniority on the post of Headmaster (Middle School) with effect from 07.09.2012, i.e., the date of their initial promotion order. From perusal of the reply filed by the State, it appears that the initial promotion order dated 07.09.2012 was cancelled vide order dated 21.09.2012 on account of certain discrepancies and irregularities pointed out in the selection/promotion process. Once the said promotion order itself stood cancelled, the subsequent promotion granted in the year 2013 cannot confer any right upon the petitioners to claim seniority from the date of the earlier cancelled order.

6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the claim of the petitioners is not sustainable. The order passed by the respondent authorities rejecting the claim of the petitioners does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and is just and proper.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed