Authorities must consider promotion claims in strict adherence to seniority when issuing fresh promotion orders.

The petitioners, working as a Ward Boy and Class-IV Labour respectively, challenged a promotion order dated 13.11.2020 issued by the Chief Medical and Health Officer (Respondent No. 5), whereby their juniors were promoted to the posts of Assistant Grade-III and Dresser Grade-II.

Although the State Government subsequently cancelled these promotion orders on 30.03.2021, a Coordinate Bench of the High Court in WPS No. 2577/2021 (and connected matters) quashed the cancellation on 05.02.2026.

The Coordinate Bench directed the respondent authorities to pass fresh orders regarding those promotions in accordance with the law after providing a hearing to the affected parties.

The petitioners sought a direction to be considered for promotion over the private respondents in this fresh exercise.

Whether the petitioners are entitled to be considered for promotion to Assistant Grade-III and Dresser Grade-II during the fresh adjudication of the promotion orders directed by the Coordinate Bench?

The court applied the principles of administrative fairness and adherence to seniority in public employment.

It primarily relied on the judicial directions issued in the previous litigation (WPS No. 2577/2021), which mandated that the respondent authorities must pass fresh orders regarding disputed promotions strictly in accordance with the law and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties.

The court observed that the original promotion orders were currently under re-evaluation due to the judgment dated 05.02.2026 in WPS No. 2577/2021, which quashed the State's cancellation of said promotions.

The court reasoned that since the authorities were already tasked with passing fresh orders, the petitioners should be permitted to present their claims of seniority and entitlement to the respondent authorities.

To ensure a fair process, the court linked the resolution of the petitioners' grievances to the existing seniority list, determining that the authorities must evaluate the petitioners' claims for promotion to higher posts (Assistant Grade-III and Dresser) while strictly honoring that list.

The court directed Respondent No. 5 to consider the names of the petitioners for promotion to Assistant Grade-III and Dresser, ensuring that any decision taken honors the relevant seniority list.

No order as to costs was made.