In a significant ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has reiterated a cornerstone principle of service law: an employee has a fundamental right to be considered for promotion, but not to the promotion itself, especially after retirement.
The case involved Nek Singh Dogra, a former Superintendent Grade-II in the Education Department who superannuated on June 30, 2024. Mr. Dogra petitioned the court, arguing that the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) meeting for promotions to Superintendent Grade-I was unduly delayed. His name was on the eligibility list, and he contended that he should be granted promotion notionally from a date before his retirement to secure higher pension benefits.
The State explained the delay, stating that the process of collecting and scrutinizing candidate particulars from field offices stretched from April to June 2024. After a panel was prepared, vigilance department instructions mandated the inclusion of immovable property details, causing further delays. The DPC meeting was ultimately convened on October 15, 2024, over three months after Mr. Dogra had retired.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Stays Defamation Decree Against HT Media in Rs. 40 Lakh Damages Case
Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, presiding over the case, dismissed the petition. The judgment leaned heavily on a recent Supreme Court decision in Government of West Bengal vs. Dr. Amal Satpathi.
"Promotion becomes effective from the date it is granted, rather than from the date a vacancy arises or the post is created... There is no fundamental right to the promotion itself."
The Court emphasized that for a promotion to be effective, an employee must assume the duties of the higher post. Granting retrospective promotion or financial benefits for a post an employee never served in is impermissible unless a specific rule exists for it, which was absent in this case.
The Court further cited its own precedent in State of H.P. vs. Amar Dogra, which held that a delayed DPC does not automatically entitle an employee to retrospective promotion unless malice or arbitrariness by the employer is proven. No such malafide intentions were alleged against the department in this instance.
Read also:- Karnataka High Court Rules POCSO Act is Gender Neutral, Upholds Charges Against Woman Accused
This ruling underscores that administrative delays, while unfortunate, do not create a vested right for promotion. The right to equality of opportunity under Article 16 of the Constitution guarantees fair consideration, but not the promotion outcome, particularly after an employee has left service.
Case Title: Nek Singh Dogra Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others
Case Number: CWP No. 5746 of 2024
