GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB Through Secretary Education And Another vs Rana GHULAM SARWAR KHAN And 111 Others
This petition for special leave to appeal arises from a judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal, which allowed the appeal of the respondents and directed the Provincial Government to grant them BPS-18 with effect from 1-9-1990. The core legal question concerned whether civil servants are entitled to promotion or the benefit of a higher grade from a back date when vacancies existed but departmental delays hindered timely promotions. The Supreme Court held that while a civil servant generally has no vested right to claim promotion from a back date simply due to the existence of a vacancy, interference with the Tribunal's order was unwarranted where the delay in processing promotions was entirely attributable to administrative tardiness within the Education Department rather than any fault of the employees. The key principle laid down is that administrative delay by departmental functionaries in completing promotion exercises should not prejudice the rightful advancement or financial upgradation of civil servants when vacancies are readily available.
- Does a civil servant have an inherent right to claim promotion from a back date merely because a vacancy existed on that date?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with an order of the Service Tribunal when promotion delays are caused entirely by departmental inaction?
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---This is a petition for special leave to appeal; from the judgment of the Punjab Service Tribunal whereby it allowed the appeal of the respondents and directed against Government to allow BPS-18 to them with effect from 1-9-1990.
2. There were 12092 posts in the College Teachers Cadre (General). The Provincial Government decided to introduce a 4-tier structure for the college teachers and with that object it classified the posts in the ratio of 1:15:34:50 into a four-tiers, namely, BPS-20, 19, 18 and 17, respectively. The relevant notification was issued on 1-9-1990. , Thereafter the functionaries in the Education Department took to years to make the appointments in accordance with the above ratio. This exercise held up the promotions of the respondents to Grade-19 till 1992. They represented to the Government that as vacancies in BPS-19 were available on 1-9-1990 when the notification in question was issued they should have been promoted from that date. Their representation was rejected by the Government whereupon they filed an appeal before the Service Tribunal. The learned Tribunal accepted their appeal and directed the Government to promote them with effect from 1-9-1990. The Government seeks leave to appeal from the judgment of the learned Tribunal.
3. On behalf of the Government it is contended that no civil servant has a right to claim that he should be promoted from a back date even though a vacancy may be existing on the date from which the promotion in being claimed. This is no doubt true but here there are no orders by the Government that the respondents/petitioners should be held up for some the. The delay in making the promotions occurred entirely due to the reason that the officials of the Education Department could not carry out a fairly simple exercise within a reasonable period. In the circumstances it will not be appropriate for this C.Ps. To interfere with the order of Service Tribunal. Leave is refused.