RAMESH KUMAR & ORS. ETC. versus STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. ETC.

Citation: [2021] 7 S.C.R. 337 · Decided: 13-11-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
337
RAMESH KUMAR & ORS. ETC.
v.
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. ETC.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 6649-6650 of 2021)
NOVEMBER 13, 2021
[M. R. SHAH AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.]
Service law: Promotion – Post of Accounts Officer(AO) –
Promotion to the post of AO sought by direct recruits to the post of
Assistant Accounts Officer (AAO) – Requirement of passing SAS
Part II exam for promotion – Held: What is not required for the
lower post, cannot be made applicable to the promotional post –
When there was no requirement of passing SAS Part II examination
for the lower post, i.e., post of AAO so far as direct recruits is
concerned, there cannot be any requirement of passing of the SAS
Part II exam for the promotional post of AO – After the appointment
as AAO either as a promotee or as a direct recruit, all shall be at
par – Thus, the requirement of passing of SAS Part II exam as per
the amended notification dated 02.01.2010 for the promotion to
the post of AO is arbitrary and illogical and rightly read down by
the High Court – High Court justified in holding that such a
requirement shall be for the promotion from the post of
Superintendent (D/A) to the post of AAO only and thus, not to be
applicable for promotion to the post of AO – Also, the High Court
rightly set aside the promotions of the AAOs junior to the direct
recruitees-AAO and issued directions to the State Electricity Board
to consider them for promotion to the post of AO from the dates the
persons junior to them in the cadre of AAO were promoted to the
post of AO – Furthermore, on facts, there was no delay in filing the
writ petitions and also the prayer of the appellant, promotees to the
post of AOs to not to revert them cannot be accepted.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Even as per the Regulation dated 01.11.2006,
there was no requirement of passing SAS Part II examination for
the direct recruit AAOs. The requirement of passing SAS Part II
examination was for the promotion from the post of
Superintendent (D/A) to the post of AAO and for the promotion
[2021] 7 S.C.R. 337
337
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
338
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 7 S.C.R.
in the promotion quota. However, when the amended notification
dated 02.01.2010 came to be issued, it provided passing of SAS
Part II examination for the post of AO and the eligibility criteria
was minimum two years service as AAO and must have passed
SAS Part II examination. As such for the post of AAO and as per
the Regulation dated 01.11.2006 as such there was no
requirement of passing SAS Part II examination so far as direct
recruits to the post of AAO are concerned. Requirement of
passing SAS Part II examination was only for promotion to the
post of AAO from the post of Superintendent (D/A). For direct
recruits as AAO, the only requirement was postgraduate degree
in commerce. Therefore, it is not understandable requirement of
passing of the SAS Part II examination for promotion to the post
of AO. When there was no requirement of passing SAS Part II
examination for the lower post, i.e., post of AAO so far as direct
recruits is concerned, there cannot be any requirement of passing
of the SAS Part II examination for the promotional post of AO.
As such after the appointment as AAO either as a promotee or
as a direct recruit, all shall be at par. Therefore, the requirement
of passing of SAS Part II examination as per the amended
notification dated 02.01.2010 for the promotion to the post of AO
can be said to be arbitrary and illogical and the same is rightly
read down by the High Court. What is not even required for the
lower post, i.e., for the post of AAO so far as the direct recruits
is concerned, the same cannot be made applicable to the
promotional post of AO. The High Court is absolutely justified in
holding that such a requirement shall be for the promotion from
the post of Superintendent (D/A) to the post of AAO only and
consequently shall not be applicable for promotion to the post of
AO. [Para 8.1][344-G-H; 345-A-F]
1.2 As regards the submission on behalf of the appellants
that they were promoted to the post of AO in the year 2010 onwards
and their promotions have been set aside after long time and
therefore in a petition filed in the year 2017, i.e., after
approximately a period of 6-7 years, the High Court ought not to
have set aside the promotions of the appellants to the post of AO
is concerned, it is required to be noted that till 2015, a litigation
was pending before this Court at the instance of the d

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.