The Supreme Court addressed that, although employees do not automatically have a right to be promoted, they do have the right to be considered for promotion when the opportunity arises, unless they have been disqualified.
NEW DELHI: On Friday, the Supreme Court of India clarified that while an employee does not have an automatic right to promotion, they do have the right to be considered for a promotion, provided they are not disqualified.
The bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran in an appeal filed by a police constable from Tamil Nadu.
The constable, who had been serving in the police force for many years, was unhappy after being denied consideration for promotion to the post of sub-inspector. The case was brought before the Supreme Court after the Madras High Court dismissed the constable’s request for promotion.
The Supreme Court addressed that, although employees do not automatically have a right to be promoted, they do have the right to be considered for promotion when the opportunity arises, unless they have been disqualified.
The bench stated, “It is trite that the employee has no right to be promoted but has a right to be considered, when selections for promotions are carried out, unless disqualified; which right has been impinged, unjustly, in the above case.”
Background:
The case involves the constable facing both departmental and criminal action after an incident in which he was accused of beating up a colleague during their posting at a check post. In the criminal case, the constable was arrested but later acquitted. Additionally, the government had overturned the punishment imposed in the departmental proceedings in 2009.
However, the police superintendent argued that the constable was not considered for promotion because he was disqualified based on a punishment he had received earlier. In May 2005, the constable had been punished with a postponement of his next increment for one year without cumulative effect. This punishment was cited as the reason for the denial of promotion consideration in 2019.
ALSO READ: Legal to Fire an Employee in India? : Understanding Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
The bench, however, disagreed with this reasoning. It pointed out that the constable’s punishment was later set aside in 2009.
“The appellant’s punishment, the bench said, was interfered with and was set aside in November 2009.”
Therefore, the court ruled that the constable could not have been excluded from consideration for promotion in 2019, as the punishment that led to the disqualification had already been overturned.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court emphasized that the constable should have been given the opportunity to be considered for promotion in 2019, without being penalized for a punishment that was no longer valid.
The bench stated, “In such circumstances, the appellant could not have been disentitled from a consideration in the year 2019.”
The Supreme Court also expressed its view that the constable’s promotion should not have been delayed due to the old punishment.
The bench added, “In the above circumstances we are of the opinion that the appellant must be considered for promotion, dehors any disentitlement due to his having become overaged.”
The court ordered that if the constable was found eligible, he should be promoted from 2019, along with all the consequential benefits, because it was not his fault that he was denied consideration for promotion based on a punishment that had already been set aside.
The bench also allowed the constable’s appeal and set aside the Madras High Court’s order from October 2023, which had dismissed his plea to be considered for promotion as an in-service candidate.
The Supreme Court noted that the constable had been appointed to the force in March 2002 and was eligible for promotion in 2019, as the government had issued a notification inviting eligible constables to apply for promotion under the 20 percent departmental quota.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
