Eligibility for promotion is contingent on fulfilling required service periods as per specified rules.

G.S. Sandhawalia , Chief Justice (Oral) Consideration in the present appeal filed by the unsuccessful writ petitioner is to the order dated 13.05.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 7967 of 2024, titled Dr. Girish Kumar Vs. State

1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

of Himachal Pradesh & others, whereby the writ petition was dismissed. H

2. The prayers made in the writ petition as such were to quash the Notification dated 19.07.2024 (Annexure P-9), vide which private respondent No. 4, a faculty member of thte cadre of IGMC Shimla, was absorbed in the cadre of Dr. RKGMC, Hamirpur against the post of Associate Professor in the Department of paediatrics; to repatriate the said respondent to his original post of Associate Professor in the Department of paediatrics in the IGMC, Shimla; not to consider the representation of the said respondent for further promotion to the post of Professor, Department of paediatrics in Dr. RKGMC, Hamirpur, in any manner; and to promote the writ petitioner to the post of Associate Professor, Department of paediatrics in Dr. RKGMC Hamirpur, in accordance with the provisions of the Recruitment and Promotion Rules.

3. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition primarily on the ground that when the case of the private respondent had been considered and approved on 01.03.2024 (Annexure R-HIII), the petitioner was not eligible for being promoted to the post of the Associate Professor, as apparently he was appointed as Assistant Professor only on 08.04.2019 (Annexure P-5). The requisite period oft five years to be considered for the post of Associate Professor would have only come up on 08.04.2024 and by that time, the private respondent having applied on 16.02.2024, the necessary permission had been granted on 01.03.2024 (Annexure R-III)

4. The argument as such raised by learned Counsel for the appellant is that as per the Himachal Pradesh Medical Education Rules , 1999 (Annexure P-4), the character of post as per Rule 3 is defined in Annexure P-1, which further provides that the post of Associate Professor was to be filled up 100% by way of promotion amongst the Assistant Professors having five years regular service, failing which by direct recruitment.

5. Reliance is also placed upon the Notification dated 17.11.2018 (Annexure P-14) to Hpoint out that the policy for cadre building in the newly opened medical colleges as such at Nahan, Chamba, Ner-Chowk and Hamirpur provided that option would be taken from teaching faculties of ItGMC, Shimla and Dr. RPGMC Kangra at Tanda by the Director of Medical Education through Principals as per vacancies as per Clause 4.

6. Thus, the case as such put forth by the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the options having not been taken from other candidates as per the admitted position in the supplementary affidavit filed by the State, the procedure which has been followed in bringing the private respondent from IGMC to Hamirpur, was incorrect and at his cost. His case for promotion was being considered and the bringing as such of the private respondent to Hamirpur has affected him adversely. It is accordingly submitted that as per rules the first preference by way of promotion and then fall back on the direct recruitment had to be made.

7. Learned Counsel for the State, on the other hand, has submitted that encadremenHt has been done as per the policy dated 17.11.2018 (Annexue P-14) in order to strengthen and enhance the faculty at Hamirpur. It is accordingly submitted that while considering the applicattion of the private respondent, the competent Authority, namely, the Director, Medical Education & Research on 01.03.2024 (Annexure R-III) did notice the fact that the application of the private respondent had been forwarded o