Promotions granted after considerable time cannot be revoked without evidence of procedural irregularity, maintaining settled service positions reinforces legal principles of justice and fairness.

JUDGMENT

MADHU JAIN J.

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner, challenging the Order dated 14.01.2025 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’) in O.A. 3577/2023, titled as Hardayal Singh Meena & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, whereby the learned Tribunal allowed the above mentioned O.A. filed by the respondents herein and held as under:

“25. The applicants case is on a better footing. They had been promoted in compliance of the Hon'ble High court of Delhi orders in 2007 and had been promoted further on 2020 and 2022. As such they have served on the promotional post for more than 15 years and are settled in high post administratively and in the eyes of the public and society. The DPC vide which they were promoted was subjected to many reviews and none of the review DPC's altered their position. Even today respondents have not unearthed any disqualification of the applicant. Rather a vague reference to the earlier DPC not preparing year wise panel has been made. Surely the applicants cannot be made to suffer for the lapse of the earlier DPC if anyandthat tooafter 15years.

26. In our considered opinion this is a fit case and applicants are deserving of relief. Hence the OA as filed by the applicants is allowed in terms of Para 8 (i) of the OA. The impugned order 06.10.2023 is quashed and set aside to the extent the same post dates the promotion of the applicant as AE (Civil). It is declared that applicants shall continue to be promoted/

postedas AE (Civil)since16.07.2007.

27. In view of the above, the OA is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Any pending MA’s stand disposed.Noorder as tocosts.”

FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are that the respondents were appointed as Junior Engineers (Civil) in the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) in the Scheduled Tribe (ST) category between the years 2000 and 2001. The respondent No.1, Hardayal Singh Meena, while working as a Junior Engineer (Civil), approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 18936/2006 titled, Hardayal Singh Meena v. M.C.D., alleging stagnation in promotion on account of non-finalisation of the seniority list of Junior Engineers (Civil). Vide Judgment dated 17.01.2007, this Court observed that non-finalisation of the seniority list was the root cause of the grievance and directed the MCD to finalise the provisional seniority list within a period of two months. This Court further directed that, after finalisation of the seniority list, the case of the petitioner therein be considered for promotion/assignment to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in terms of his seniority and in accordance with law. The Judgment did not issue any direction for automatic or deemed promotion.

3. In compliance with the aforesaid directions, the MCD issued a provisional seniority list of Junior Engineers (Civil) on 09.03.2007. As per the said seniority list, the seniority positions of the present respondents were beyond Serial No. 1000, with Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 placed at Serial Nos. 1016, 1022, 1027, 1025 and 1014, respectively.

4. Subsequently, a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) was convened on 14.06.2007 for considering promotion from the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) to Assistant Engineer (Civil). As per the Recruitment Rules, Junior Engineers with six years of regular service and possessing a degree in Civil Engineering, or eight years of regular service with a diploma, were eligi