H.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD versus SHRI K.R. GULATI

H.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD versus SHRI K.R. GULATI

The Tribunal's direction to treat the respondent as promoted with effect from 31st May, 1966 is wholly without jurisdiction as the Board was not in existence on that date, and essential parties were absent. The Departmental Promotion Committee erred by holding the respondent unsuitable merely on the ground that he had lost touch with stenography, as seniority is the proper criterion. However, the respondent cannot re-agitate the same cause after accepting promotion in the clerical line and subsequently retiring; therefore, it is not justifiable to reconsider his promotion in the stenography line or grant consequential benefits.

Parties
Appellant: H.P. State Electricity Board; Respondent: Shri K.R. Gulati
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
03 February 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment of Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.a. No. 1374 of 1992
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Promotion, Seniority, Recruitment, Cadre Management, Jurisdiction, Administrative Tribunals, Constitutional Rights
Service Law Promotion Seniority Recruitment Cadre Management Jurisdiction Administrative Tribunals Constitutional Rights

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H.P. State Electricity Board

Appellant

Shri K.R. Gulati

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment of Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.a. No. 1374 of 1992

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-consideration of the respondent for promotion to Senior Stenographer constitutes an infraction of Article 16 of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether the respondent could claim reversion from the clerical line to the stenography line after accepting promotions
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal's direction to treat the respondent as promoted with effect from 31st May, 1966 was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's direction to treat the respondent as promoted with effect from 31st May, 1966 is wholly without jurisdiction as the Board was not in existence on that date, and essential parties were absent. The Departmental Promotion Committee erred by holding the respondent unsuitable merely on the ground that he had lost touch with stenography, as seniority is the proper criterion. However, the respondent cannot re-agitate the same cause after accepting promotion in the clerical line and subsequently retiring; therefore, it is not justifiable to reconsider his promotion in the stenography line or grant consequential benefits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment of Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 1374 of 1992 set aside
  • O.A. No. 1374 of 1992 dismissed