The Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld the legality of a conditional promotion granted to an Under Secretary in the Law and Legislative Affairs Department, emphasizing that imposing conditions in promotions serves the state’s interest, particularly when pending financial objections are involved. The Court observed that conditional promotions are a legitimate exercise of administrative authority to safeguard public funds and ensure proper compliance with financial regulations, and such conditions do not amount to punitive or arbitrary action against the officer concerned.
The petitioner in this matter, an officer belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category, had applied for promotion to the post of Deputy Secretary. However, his promotion was initially withheld by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) in 2012. At that time, the DPC awarded him 11 marks instead of the 13 marks required for promotion, citing the absence of his Annual Confidential Report (ACR) for 2011. Following judicial intervention, a review DPC was convened in 2021, which awarded him the full 13 marks and recommended his promotion. Subsequently, the promotion was approved by the Law Minister and issued on May 17, 2021, but with two conditions attached.
The first condition made the promotion subject to the outcome of an objection regarding the officer’s earlier promotion, while the second condition stipulated that the decision on granting his annual increment would be made only after the Accountant General resolved an alleged excess payment of ₹10,84,868. The petitioner challenged these conditions, arguing that they were unfair and unnecessary and sought their removal through the High Court.
The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru, rejected the petitioner’s challenge and upheld the conditional nature of the promotion. The Court reasoned that imposing such conditions is a legitimate administrative measure to protect the financial interests of the state. It highlighted that the conditions were precautionary in nature, aimed at ensuring that the promotion did not result in undue or unjust financial consequences for the state, rather than being intended as punitive action against the officer.
The Court further noted that the conditions were imposed in good faith and were neither arbitrary nor discriminatory. The state has a responsibility to maintain financial integrity, particularly when there are unresolved objections concerning prior financial entitlements or alleged excess payments. In such circumstances, conditional promotions are appropriate to balance the officer’s career progression with the need to protect public funds.
This judgment underscores the principle that administrative authorities have the discretion to impose reasonable conditions on promotions, especially when financial or procedural issues remain pending. It reinforces the notion that safeguarding state resources and ensuring compliance with financial regulations take precedence, even when individual officers seek unconditional promotion. The ruling demonstrates the judiciary’s careful balancing of individual rights against the state’s interest, ensuring that administrative actions are fair, reasonable, and in alignment with the broader objectives of public administration.
By upholding the conditional promotion, the Chhattisgarh High Court has reaffirmed the validity of administrative discretion in personnel matters, establishing that conditions aimed at preventing financial discrepancies serve the public interest and do not undermine the officer’s rights. This judgment is a significant precedent in understanding the interplay between individual entitlements and the state’s financial accountability in the context of government promotions.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.