Skip to main content

PROMOTION AFTER SUPERANNUATION

INTRODUCTION 

Hello friends, today we shall discuss the technicalities which are quite common in the service industry, particularly with the employees who are serving in the government jobs. Very often, the person who is retired on attaining the age of super-annuation is being left out merely on the pretext that the date on which DPC (Departmental Promotional Committee) is being held, the concerned employee is already being retired. That is to say, the persons who are otherwise eligible for promotion is left out merely because the date on which DPC was held, he/she is not on the rolls of the said company. 

ISSUE 

whether a person who has attained the age of superannuation before the date of DPC is eligible for promotion or not?

LAW POINT 

In all these years, there were diverse viewpoints on this issue, many courts have observed that merely because there is delay in conducting DPC's, the employee shall not be held liable. However, to be very specific, there was a judgment commonly named as PG George Judgment, in which the Tribunal ordered in favor of the retired employee to be eligible for promotion from the date his / her junior has been promoted. The same has been upheld by the higher courts as well. This judgement has been duly passed considering the OM issued by DOpT in the year 1998. 

Recently, in the year 2023, the Division bench of the Delhi High Court in Case titled UOI VS Bishan Singh, has taken up the same issue wherein DPC was held after the employee has attained superannuation but has not considered him merely because the employee was not in service when the DPC held. However, the Division Bench following the above discussed scenario, has observed that since the junior was promoted from the year when the retired employee was in service, hence by applying the principle followed in PG George Case, it was held that the retired person is eligible for Notional promotion & other retirial benefits since the date his / her junior was promoted.  

Till date there are judgments available favouring both sides, however, the ratio decided in the judgment passed by Delhi High Court as discussed above has made more or less clear that in case a junior is being promoted from the date when the retired employee was in service, the Company cannot deny the same to the retired employee merely by saying that he was not on rolls when the DPC was held.

I hope I have made myself clear, for any suggestions please feel free to write in the comment section below.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MARRIAGE REGISTRATION PROCESS IN DELHI

 Hello friends today we shall talk about the procedure for registration of marriage in Delhi.   ELIGIBILITY The marriage must have been solemnized either under the Hindu Marriage Act or under the Special Marriage Act, The Groom must have attained the minimum age of 21 years. The bride must be of the age of 18 years at least.   DOCUMENTS REQUIRED Photo ID proofs of both the parties like Aadhar card / PAN card / Voter card Date of birth proofs of both parties like 10 th certificate, etc. Permanent address proof must be there . Marriage photographs and Invitation Card. Passport Size Photographs of both parties. 2 witness in case marriage registered under Hindu Marriage Act or 3 witnesses in case it is registered under the Special Marriage Act along with their respective proofs like PAN CARD/ AADHAR CARD etc. An affidavit from both parties certifying the date of their marriage and more specifically stating that the marriage has not been performed between pers...
1 comment
Read more

BENGALURU CONSUMER COURT IMPOSES PENALTY ON FLIPKART

RECENTLY BENGALURU DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DIRECTED ONLINE MERCHANT FLIPKART TO REFUND AN ANOUNT OF RS. 13,999/- ALONGWITH COMPENSATION OF RS. 10,000/- TO A 80-YEAR OLD FOR CAUSING MENTAL AGONY. BRIEF FACTS An 80 -Year Old Consumer ordered a treadmill on the online site of Opposite Party Flipkart. In compliance the treadmill was delivered to the consumer. At the time of installation of the product, it was revealed by the technician that the treadmill is faulty. On coming to know that the consumer returned the product to Flipkart and sought replacement. Initially Flipkart failed to replace the product but in some time, the replaced product was delivered to consumer, however, despite requests they failed to send the technician. When consumer tried to fix the same on its own, it was found that the product was of some other company. In other words, it was not the same product which has been initially ordered by the consumer. With no resolution, the consumer was left with no other option bu...
Post a Comment
Read more

KERALA HIGH COURT BARS ENTRY OF 10 YEAR GIRL FROM ENTERING SABARIMALA TEMPLE

RECENTLY KERALA HIGH COURT DISMISSED WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE  226 OF CONSTITUTION FILED BY FATHER ON BEHALF OF HIS 10- YEAR OLD GIRL FOR SEEKING AN ORDER TO ENTER SABARIMALA TEMPLE. THE SAME IS DISMISSED IN LIGHT OF REVIEW PENDING ON THE SAID ISSUE BEFORE THE LARGER BENCH OF THE APEX COURT. BRIEF FACTS 10 year old girl filed a writ petition before the Kerala HIgh Court seeking relief of mandamus seeking directions to Travancore Devaswom Board to allow her to offer pilgrimage to Sabarimala Temple without taking into account the restrictions of age since she has not attained puberty or in the alternative to allow the request of the minor on sympathetic grounds. It is contended by the Petitioner that they are planning to visit the temple since long and it has been delayed due to onset of Covid earlier. Now, the family is under distress and also the father of Petitioner is not in good health. Hence, they have applied the same online but since in the meanwhile the age of Petit...
Post a Comment
Read more