In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India has overturned a Patna High Court judgement that directed the Bihar State Electricity Board (BSEB) to retrospectively promote an employee, Mr. Dharamdeo Das, to the position of Joint Secretary. The Supreme Court ruled that the right to be considered for promotion does not automatically translate into an immediate right to the promotion itself.
The respondent, Mr. Dharamdeo Das, a physically challenged individual from the Scheduled Caste category, was employed by the BSEB since 1976. He sought promotion to the post of Joint Secretary with effect from July 29, 1997, based on a resolution that prescribed a three-year qualifying period for such promotions. Despite multiple accelerated promotions throughout his career, Das’s plea for retrospective promotion was rejected by the BSEB, leading to prolonged litigation.
Legal Issues
1. Kal Awadhi and Promotion Eligibility: The core legal issue revolved around the interpretation of the ‘Kal Awadhi’ or the qualifying period for promotion, as prescribed in a 1991 resolution by the BSEB. The respondent argued that upon completing this period, he should have been automatically promoted.
2. Retrospective Promotion: The respondent sought retrospective promotion from 1997, despite being officially promoted to the position of Joint Secretary in 2003.
3. Fundamental Right to Consideration: The court examined whether the respondent’s right to be considered for promotion was violated and if it translated into a right to retrospective promotion.
Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court emphasized that the right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right under Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India. However, this right does not imply an automatic entitlement to promotion upon meeting the eligibility criteria.
Court stated:
โA promotion is effective from the date it is granted and not from the date when a vacancy occurs on the subject post or when the post itself is created. The eligibility for promotion does not confer a vested right to promotion.”
The court further clarified that retrospective seniority cannot be granted unless explicitly provided by the service rules. It was noted that the respondent had already received five accelerated promotions within a decade, and the administrative decisions made by the BSEB, including the reduction of posts due to state bifurcation, were justified.
The court found no evidence of malafide intent or violation of the respondentโs rights in the BSEB’s decisions. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s decision and restored the order of the learned Single Judge, which had dismissed the respondent’s writ petition.
The parties were directed to bear their own expenses, concluding a significant case that will impact promotion policies and legal interpretations in the public sector.
Also Read
Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 6977 of 2015
Bench: Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
Appellants: Bihar State Electricity Board and Others
Respondent: Dharamdeo Das
Lawyers: Mr. Navin Prakash for the appellants, Mr. Amit Pawan for the respondent
