23
The bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran was considering an appeal filed by a police constable from Tamil Nadu, who was distressed by not considering promotion for the post of Sub-Inspector.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday said that the employee does not have the right to promotion, but has the right to be considered for promotion until disqualified. The bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran was considering an appeal filed by a police constable from Tamil Nadu, who was distressed by not considering promotion for the post of Sub-Inspector. The bench said that it is common that the employee does not have the right to promotion, but has the right to consider being selected for promotion, until disqualified. This right has been violated unjustly in the above case.
The appellant was arrested in criminal case
The Supreme Court found that he had to face both departmental and criminal action on charges of beating a colleague during the deployment at the check post. The appellant was arrested in the criminal case, but was later acquitted, but the government rejected the sentence arising out of departmental proceedings in 2009. However, the Superintendent of Police said that the appellant was not considered for promotion, as he was disqualified. In May 2005, his promotion was not considered in accordance with the rules due to the punishment for postponing the next increment for one year.
Also read: Delhi government is thinking on transferring Chandni Chowk and Sadar Bazar, Merchant Welfare Board will be made
The bench said that the appellant’s sentence was intervened and it was canceled in November 2009. The bench said in its judgment that in such circumstances the appellant could not be denied consideration in the year 2019. It said that in the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appellant should be considered for promotion, even if his age is not deprived of any way.
If found eligible, the petitioner will be promoted from 2019
The bench said that it would be considered and if it is found to be qualified, it will be promoted from 2019 and the resulting benefits would be given to him, because it was not his fault that the authority refused his views for promotion on the basis of punishment, which had already been rejected. The bench accepted the appeal of the individual, challenging the order passed by the Madras High Court on October 2023, in which his plea to consider him as a serving candidate was rejected.
Also read: Rouse Avainu Court issued notice in National Herald case, Rahul-Sonia Gandhi in trouble
