COAL INDIA LTD. AND ORS. versus SAROJ KUMAR MISHRA

COAL INDIA LTD. AND ORS. versus SAROJ KUMAR MISHRA

Employees were entitled to notional promotion as claimed, since rules and office memorandums did not allow withholding of promotion merely due to pending vigilance cases without initiation of departmental proceedings or issuance of charge sheet. The employer, being a State, must act with reasonableness and fairness as required by the Constitution.

Parties
Appellant: Coal India Ltd. and Ors.; Respondent: Saroj Kumar Mishra
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Promotion, Vigilance Proceedings, Sealed Cover Procedure, Notional Promotion, Seniority Cum Merit, Reasonableness in State Action
Service Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Promotion Vigilance Proceedings Sealed Cover Procedure Notional Promotion Seniority Cum Merit +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Coal India Ltd. and Ors.

Appellant

Saroj Kumar Mishra

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether employees denied promotion due to pending vigilance cases are entitled to notional promotion from the date their juniors were promoted
  2. 2 Whether the rules and office memorandums permit withholding promotion pending vigilance or departmental proceedings
  3. 3 Interpretation of rules in light of constitutional principles of equality

Ratio Decidendi

Employees were entitled to notional promotion as claimed, since rules and office memorandums did not allow withholding of promotion merely due to pending vigilance cases without initiation of departmental proceedings or issuance of charge sheet. The employer, being a State, must act with reasonableness and fairness as required by the Constitution.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Respondents declared entitled to notional promotion from the date their juniors were promoted, with all consequential service and financial benefits.
  • Appellants to pay costs; Counsel's fee assessed at Rs. 50,000/-