Respondents directed to consider candidates for Library Assistant posts following cancellation of interim Junior Assistant promotions.

The nineteen applicants were appointed as Class-IV employees in 2008 and were later placed as In-charge Junior Assistants in their own pay and grade in 2014

This promotion was subject to a condition that they qualify for a typing test and be confirmed by a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) within six months

On July 9, 2026, the respondents issued Order No. CEOJ/NG/026/3650-57, which cancelled these promotions and demoted the applicants back to Class-IV posts

The applicants contended they were demoted after 12 years of service without a personal hearing

The respondents argued that the applicants failed to participate in the required typing tests conducted periodically, thus necessitating their reversion to substantive positions

1. Whether the cancellation of the applicants' promotion and their subsequent reversion to Class-IV posts after 12 years of service was legally sustainable without a personal hearing.

2. Whether the applicants are eligible for alternative promotion to the post of Library Assistants based on seniority and rules.

The Court applied the principle of conditional promotion and administrative reversion, where "In-charge" arrangements in an official's "own pay and grade" do not confer a vested right to the post unless the prescribed eligibility criteria, such as qualifying exams (typing tests) and DPC clearance, are met within the stipulated timeframe

Furthermore, the court exercised its discretionary power under the Administrative Tribunals Act to direct the administration to consider the applicants for alternative promotional avenues (Library Assistant) based on seniority and existing recruitment rules

The Court analyzed the nature of the applicants' 2014 promotion, noting it was an interim arrangement contingent upon qualifying a typing test within six months

The respondents demonstrated that the applicants had failed to participate in the requisite tests, justifying the reversion to their substantive Class-IV posts under the terms of the original promotion order

However, rather than adjudicating solely on the validity of the demotion, the Court leveraged a concession made by the Additional Advocate General (A.A.G.), who stated the department was willing to consider the applicants for the post of Library Assistant

The Court found this to be a pragmatic resolution, aligning the applicants' long service record with the department's seniority-based promotion rules without necessitating a full trial on the merits of the demotion order

The Court directed the respondents to consider the case of the applicants for promotion to the post of Library Assistants in accordance with their seniority and the applicable rules

The respondents were ordered to pass a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks from the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment