Facts
The petitioner, an Assistant Engineer with the Assam Urban Water Supply and Sewerage Board, claimed eligibility for promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer after completing the five-year qualifying service prescribed under the rules adopted by the Board
Source reference: p.3He had held charge of the higher post intermittently from 2008 to 2014 and, from 2016, on an almost permanent basis without additional financial benefit
Source reference: pp.3–4, para. 8Although a DPC had been scheduled and later held, no promotion recommendation had been made; the Board stated that the promotion process remained under active consideration
Source reference: pp.3–4, paras. 2, 5The petitioner sought consideration for promotion and consequential relief under Article 226 of the Constitution
Source reference: p.2Issues
1. Whether the petitioner, having completed the qualifying service in the feeder cadre, was entitled to fair consideration for promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer
Source reference: p.5, para. 82. Whether the Court should direct the Board to convene a DPC and consider the petitioner’s case for promotion against available vacancies
Source reference: p.5, paras. 9–10Law Applied
Promotion is not an indefeasible right, but an employee has a right to fair consideration for promotion
Source reference: p.5, para. 8Under the rules adopted by the Board, five years’ service in the Assistant Engineer cadre is the qualifying period for consideration for promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer
Source reference: p.3The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 to direct consideration in accordance with law; it did not identify or apply any precedent
Source reference: p.2; p.5, para. 10Reasoning
The Court found that the petitioner had completed the five-year qualifying service and was therefore eligible to be considered for promotion
Source reference: p.5, para. 8His history of holding charge of the higher post was also noted, but the Court did not treat that arrangement as conferring an entitlement to promotion
Source reference: p.5, paras. 8–9Given the Board’s confirmation that the promotion process was under consideration, the Court directed an expeditious DPC process for the petitioner and other eligible candidates rather than ordering the petitioner’s promotion outright
Source reference: pp.4–5, paras. 5, 9–10Holding
The Court disposed of the petition and directed the Board’s Managing Director to take expeditious steps to convene a DPC and consider the petitioner, along with other aspiring candidates, for vacancies in the Assistant Executive Engineer cadre in accordance with law.
The exercise was to be completed within three months of receipt of a certified copy of the order
Source reference: p.5, para. 10The petition was allowed in those terms
Source reference: p.5, para. 11Original Court PDF
Indra Mohan SarmahvsThe State Of Assam And Anr
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
