Court Upholds Rejection of Petitioner's Claim for Regularization and Service Benefits Due to Non-Compliance with Recruitment Rules
In a significant decision, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed the petition of Salochna Devi, rejecting her claim for seniority and other service benefits from the date of her adhoc promotion. The court upheld the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board's (HPSEB) decision to deny seniority benefits to Devi, who had been promoted to the post of Clerk on an adhoc basis in 1991, a promotion deemed to be in excess of the prescribed quota and not in accordance with the Recruitment and Promotion Rules.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Ranjan Sharma, emphasized that the adhoc service rendered beyond the prescribed quota cannot be counted for seniority or regularization benefits. The petitioner, who served as a Peon before being promoted as a Clerk on an adhoc basis, contended that her service from 1991 to 1995 should be regularized. However, the court found that the promotion was beyond the 15% quota set for Class-IV non-technical staff, thereby rendering the service as fortuitous and non-eligible for seniority or other service benefits.
The court referenced several landmark Supreme Court cases, including Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association v. State of Maharashtra, to reinforce the principle that adhoc appointments not made according to rules or within the prescribed quota cannot be considered for seniority. Justice Sharma noted that any service rendered outside the prescribed quota or in excess of it is fortuitous, and thus, does not confer any legal entitlement to seniority or other benefits.
Furthermore, the court observed that granting the petitioner's claim for seniority from the date of her adhoc promotion would unsettle the seniority of other employees who were appointed according to the rules and within the quota during the same period. The court also pointed out the absence of other affected parties in the petition, which further disqualified the petitioner's claim for retrospective seniority or promotion.
The decision underscores the sacrosanct nature of recruitment and promotion quotas, reaffirming that any deviation from these statutory provisions without proper procedural compliance cannot be legitimized through judicial intervention.
Bottom Line:
Adhoc promotion beyond prescribed quota in Recruitment and Promotion Rules does not confer entitlement to seniority or other service benefits.
Statutory provision(s): Recruitment and Promotion Rules, Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association v. State of Maharashtra, Keshav Chandra Joshi v. Union of India, State of West Bengal v. Aghore Nath Dev, Vinod Giri Goswami v. State of Uttarakhand.
