The Supreme Court ruled that promotions are effective only upon officially assuming duties, not retroactively from the date of vacancy or recommendation. This decision arose from a West Bengal case regarding a retired officer’s entitlement to notional financial benefits post-retirement. The court emphasized that while the right to consider promotion is fundamental, there is no absolute right to promotion itself.
New Delhi: In a landmark judgment delivered on Wednesday (Nov 27th), the Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle that “promotion only becomes effective upon assumption of duties and not from the date of the vacancy or recommendation.” A bench comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and Sandeep Mehta underscored that while the right to be considered for promotion is both a statutory and fundamental right, the right to promotion itself is not absolute.
The verdict was issued in response to an appeal filed by the West Bengal government against a February 2023 judgment by the Calcutta High Court. The high court had upheld an order by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal directing the grant of notional financial benefits to a retired principal scientific officer. The tribunal ruled that he was entitled to these benefits for the post of chief scientific officer as of his retirement date, December 31, 2016.
The apex court ruled that promotion is only effective when the duties and responsibilities of the promotional post are formally assumed. Citing Rule 54(1)(a) of the West Bengal Service Rules, the court emphasized that retrospective promotion cannot be granted after retirement, as it requires the physical assumption of the role.
The state government argued that the retired officer could not claim financial benefits, even on a notional basis, as he had never assumed charge of the promotional post. Supporting this contention, the court stated:
“Considering that he superannuated before his promotion was effectuated, he was not entitled to retrospective financial benefits associated with the promotional post, as he did not serve in that capacity.”
While the respondent’s lawyer contended that delays in departmental procedures had deprived the officer of a timely promotion, the Supreme Court maintained that the “right to be considered for promotion” is a fundamental right under Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution. However, the court clarified:
“There is no fundamental right to promotion itself.”
The judgment also referred to established legal precedents, reaffirming that promotion is conditional upon fulfilling specific criteria, including the assumption of duties. The bench concluded that the promotion was not effectuated due to the officer’s retirement, and therefore, retrospective financial benefits could not be awarded.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgments of the Calcutta High Court and the administrative tribunal. The ruling has far-reaching implications for public service employees, particularly in cases of delayed promotions.
This judgment serves as a significant reminder for employers and employees alike about the legal framework governing promotions. It clarifies that procedural delays cannot result in retrospective promotions or financial benefits without the assumption of duties. This ensures fairness and adherence to established service rules.
By reiterating the boundaries of promotional rights, the Supreme Court has provided clarity and consistency in cases of delayed promotions, setting a crucial precedent for future disputes in public service employment.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES