Respondents Directed to Decide Seniority and Promotion Representations Via Reasoned Order Within Stipulated Timeline

The four applicants, serving as In-charge Assistant Engineers (Electrical) in the J&K Power Development Department since December 31, 2018, challenged the department's promotion process for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer.

They alleged that the department issued letters on December 17 and 18, 2024, seeking service records (APRs and integrity certificates) for 13 direct recruits appointed in 2019, while completely overlooking the applicants who were promoted to the cadre earlier.

The applicants contended that the department failed to prepare a consolidated seniority list despite prior High Court directions in SWP No. 374/2017, leading to a situation where juniors were being considered for promotion over seniors.

Having received no response to their departmental representations dated January 19, 2026, and February 26, 2026, they approached the Tribunal.

1. Whether the respondents’ act of considering junior direct recruits for promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer while bypassing the earlier-promoted applicants is arbitrary and legally sustainable.

2. Whether the failure to maintain a consolidated seniority list of Assistant Engineers violates established service jurisprudence and High Court mandates.

The court referenced the procedural necessity of maintaining a "consolidated seniority list" as per the directions of the Hon’ble High Court in SWP No. 374/2017 and the seniority guidelines issued by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Government of India.

It further applied the principle that administrative authorities must dispose of pending representations through "reasoned and speaking orders".

The Tribunal noted the applicants' grievance that they were being bypassed for promotion in favor of juniors due to the lack of a formalized seniority list.

Rather than adjudicating on the final merits, the Tribunal accepted the counsel's restricted prayer to treat the Original Application as a supplementary representation to the one already pending since January 2026.

The Bench reasoned that the respondents must first address the factual and legal claims regarding seniority and eligibility at the departmental level.

To prevent the applicants' claims from becoming infructuous during this review, the Tribunal found it necessary to grant interim protection by staying the further processing of promotion-related document calls for a limited duration.

The respondents are ordered to decide the matter by passing a reasoned and speaking order within two weeks.

Furthermore, the Tribunal directed that the respondents shall not act upon the letters dated December 17 and 18, 2024 (which initiated the promotion process for the junior recruits) for a period of two weeks or until the representation is decided, whichever is earlier.

No order as to costs was made.