Department must decide an inadvertently omitted employee’s promotion claim within 60 days.

The petitioner, a Head Master and previously serving as an Upper Division Teacher, claimed eligibility for promotion to the post of Lecturer in Hindi/History along with similarly situated employees who were promoted by order dated 29 December 2018.

The State admitted that, despite the petitioner possessing the requisite qualifications and qualifying service, his name was inadvertently omitted from consideration for promotion.

His case was forwarded to the Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Chhattisgarh, through proposals dated 29 November 2017 and 13 September 2018.

As no decision was taken, the petitioner approached the High Court seeking consideration for promotion, consequential promotion from the due date, and arrears of salary and pension.

1. Whether the petitioner’s claim for promotion to the post of Lecturer in Hindi/History, having allegedly been omitted due to departmental error despite possessing the requisite qualifications and service, was required to be considered by the competent authority.

2. Whether the High Court should directly grant promotion and consequential monetary benefits, or instead direct the competent authority to decide the petitioner’s pending promotion claim.

The Court applied the administrative law principle that a public authority must duly consider an eligible employee’s claim for promotion, particularly where the department acknowledges that the employee was omitted from consideration due to its own mistake.

The Court exercised its writ jurisdiction to issue a direction for consideration and decision by the competent authority within a prescribed period.

The State’s pleadings established that the petitioner possessed the requisite qualifications and qualifying service and that his non-consideration resulted from an inadvertent departmental omission.

Since his name had subsequently been forwarded for consideration through departmental proposals dated 29 November 2017 and 13 September 2018, the Court found that the competent authority had yet to take a decision on his claim.

Rather than adjudicating the petitioner’s entitlement to promotion or granting retrospective promotion and arrears directly, the Court directed the Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Chhattisgarh, to consider and decide the matter within 60 days of receiving the order.

The Court did not itself grant promotion, retrospective benefits, salary arrears, pension arrears, or interest; those claims were left to be considered by the competent authority.