Promotion not effective from post creation date; retrospective promotion denied post-retirement.

The applicant, initially appointed in the office of Deputy Director, Postal Accounts, Bhopal, joined NCERT as Senior Accountant on deputation for one year on July 6, 1994

His request for permanent absorption was initially approved on August 11, 1997, but subsequently turned down on December 18, 1997, due to no provision for absorption of deputationists, advising participation in open recruitment

The applicant then appeared in an examination for Senior Accountant on March 28-29, 1998, and was declared successful on May 25, 1998

Respondent No. 3 absorbed the applicant with effect from July 6, 1999, instead of May 25, 1998

The applicant's name appeared at Sl. 8 on the seniority list dated April 22, 2003

A DPC was convened on December 27, 2004, to consider candidates for Accounts Officer from the April 22, 2003, seniority list, and the applicant was recommended

Despite being recommended and making representations, the promotion order was not passed before his retirement on May 31, 2006

The applicant lodged grievances on September 29, 2014, and July 13, 2015, which were rejected on September 28, 2015, on the ground that no juniors were promoted while he was in service

The applicant contended that juniors were promoted to Accounts Officer based on a seniority list dated June 19, 2006, after his retirement

The respondents maintained that his appointment in NCERT was effective from July 6, 1999, as his technical resignation from the lending department was accepted from that date, thus his seniority was fixed accordingly

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to retrospective promotion to the post of Accounts Officer from the date of the DPC recommendation or prior to his superannuation

2. Whether the applicant, having retired without joining the promotional post, can claim notional promotion and benefits, even if his juniors were promoted after his retirement

The court relied on the established legal principle that a promotion only becomes effective upon the assumption of duties on the promotional post

It cited Union of India v. K. K. Vadera - 1989 Supp (2) SCC 625, which held that "a promotion to that post should be from the date the promotion is granted and not from the date on which such post falls vacant"

Additionally, the court noted DOPT guidelines stating that promotion is not a matter of right but must be earned based on performance in the feeder cadre

The court found it undisputed that the applicant was recommended for promotion by the DPC on December 27, 2004, but no promotion order was issued, and he retired on May 31, 2005, without joining the promotional post

Applying the principle from Union of India v. K. K. Vadera, the court reasoned that a promotion becomes effective only upon the assumption of duties; therefore, an employee whose promotion was not effectuated before retirement is not entitled to retrospective promotion or notional benefits

Since the applicant did not work after his retirement on May 31, 2005, and his juniors were promoted in 2009, his claim for promotion after superannuation was not justified, as promotion is contingent on working in the department and performance

The court held that the applicant, having retired without assuming duties on the promotional post, was not entitled to retrospective promotion or notional benefits

Accordingly, OA No. 1086/2015 was dismissed, with no order as to costs