Amending non-statutory service regulations to change promotion criteria does not violate any vested right of ineligible employees.

The petitioner was engaged as a daily wage employee in the Tea Development Project in 1995 and subsequently became a daily wage employee of the Uttarakhand Tea Development Board upon its inception in 2004.

His services as a Lab Supervisor were regularized in 2014.

The petitioner challenged a Government Order dated 01.05.2018, which amended the Board's regulations (restructured the cadre) by stipulating that the post of Soil Scientist would be filled via direct recruitment requiring an M.Sc. degree.

Previously, Clause 16 of the Service Regulations allowed for promotion to the post of Soil Scientist from the rank of Lab Supervisor with 10 years of experience.

The petitioner contended that the amendment deprived him of his only avenue for promotion.

The State argued that the Board is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860; therefore, its internal regulations are not statutory and the State/Board possesses the authority to amend them to ensure higher qualifications for senior positions.

1. Whether a daily wage employee regularized in 2014 has a vested right to be considered for promotion under unamended regulations when he did not meet the eligibility criteria at the time of the amendment.

2. Whether the State Government/Board has the legal authority to amend non-statutory service regulations to change the mode of recruitment and educational qualifications.

Statement identifying a key statute, principle, or precedent: Service regulations of a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, which are not referable to any statute, do not constitute statutory law and can be amended by executive instructions or administrative orders.

Statement on the doctrine derived from a case: An employee does not possess a vested or accrued right to promotion, but only a right to be "considered" for promotion according to the rules in force at the time of eligibility.

The Court upheld the employer's prerogative to determine the mode of recruitment and prescribe higher qualifications for senior technical posts.

The Court reasoned that since the Uttarakhand Tea Development Board is a society fully funded by the State, the Government Order issued at the Director’s request was a valid exercise of administrative authority to restructure the cadre.

The Court noted that the previous regulations required 10 years of service as a Lab Supervisor for promotion; however, the petitioner had only completed 4 years of service by the time the 2018 amendment was enacted. Because the petitioner would not have become eligible for promotion until 2024 under the old rules, there was no "accrued or vested right" affected by the 2018 change.

The Court found nothing unreasonable in the requirement for a Master’s degree for the senior post of Soil Scientist and held that the employer is within its rights to prioritize direct recruitment over promotion to ensure academic competence in specialized roles.

The Writ Petition was dismissed, and the Court declined to interfere with the restructuring or the new recruitment qualifications.