An employee is entitled to promotion from the date of eligibility if vacancies exist and the administrative delay in convening the Departmental Review Committee is not attributable to the employee, especially when guidelines mandate periodic committee meetings.

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

The delay of 55 days in filing the special leave petition is condoned.

This petition is directed against order dated 5.10.2010 passed by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent against the order passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') dismissing the original application filed by him for issue of a direction to the petitioners herein to promote him under the Flexible Complementing Scheme (FCS) with effect from the date of eligibility was allowed.

We have heard Ms. Indira Sawhney, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Jitendra Mohan Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent and carefully perused the record.

The respondent, who was working as Scientist Grade-D in the Botanical Survey of India became eligible for promotion under FCS with effect from 1.1.1999. However, on account of non-convening of the Departmental Review Committee/Selection Committee, his promotion was delayed and by an order dated 20.10.2000, he was promoted with effect from 19.9.2000.

The respondent filed Original Application No. 862/2003 for directing the petitioners to promote him with effect from the date of eligibility, i.e. 1.1.1999. The Tribunal dismissed the original application. However, the Tribunal also clarified that in O.M. Dated 10.11.1998, the applicants were not entitled to promotion with retrospective effect.

The review petition filed by the respondent was dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 14.1.2004.

However,

Writ Petition (C) No.14263/2004 filed by the respondent was allowed by the Division Bench of the High Court and the petitioners were directed to give him all the benefits on the basis of deemed promotion with effect from 1.1.1999.

In our view, reasons assigned by the High Court for directing the petitioners to promote the respondent with effect from the date of acquiring the eligibility are legally correct and the impugned order does not suffer from any legal error warranting interference under Article 136 of the Constitution.

It is not in dispute that vacancies existed when the Departmental Review Committee considered the case of the respondent and other similarly situated persons for promotion.

It is also not in dispute that in terms of paragraph 51.25 of the Vth Pay Commission Recommendations, the Departmental Review Committee/Assessment Board was required to meet every six months, i.e. in January and July and the promotions were to be made effective from the date of eligibility. Therefore, it is not possible to find any flaw in the direction given by the High Court.

The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.

Since the time fixed by the High Court for compliance of the direction given by it has already expired, we direct the petitioners to do the needful within four weeks from today.

Similar order shall be passed for all similarly situated persons despite the fact that they may not have approached the High Court questioning the order passed by the Tribunal.

This direction is being given to avoid further litigation in the matter.