Retrospective Promotion Entitles Backwages for Exonerated Employees Absent Recorded Reasons to Deny.

The applicant, Hari Shankar Upadhyay, was subjected to disciplinary proceedings and a vigilance case which led to recommendations for promotion being kept in a sealed cover

After his discharge in the vigilance case by the High Court of Orissa and the dropping of disciplinary proceedings, he was retrospectively promoted to Chief Conservator of Forests (CCF) with effect from 23.02.2012 (the date his junior, Sri S.P.Mohapatra, was promoted) via notification dated 17.03.2018

Subsequently, he was also promoted to Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Addl. PCCF) with effect from the date his junior, Sri S.K.Acharya, was promoted (05.02.2016) notionally, with financial benefits from his actual joining date on 02.06.2018

The State of Odisha submitted an affidavit stating that the OA renders infructuous due to these promotions

The applicant, however, sought full salary from the date of retrospective promotion arguing that he was deprived of promotion due to proceedings that were ultimately extinguished

1. Whether the applicant's prayer for retrospective promotion to the posts of CCF and Addl. PCCF was rendered infructuous by the subsequent promotions

2. Whether the applicant was entitled to back wages for the period of notional promotion to CCF and Addl. PCCF

3. Whether the respondents were required to provide reasons for denying arrears of salary or part thereof for the period of notional promotion

The court primarily applied DoP&T OM No. 22011/4/91-Estt. (A) dated 14.09.1992, which mandates that if a government servant is completely exonerated after disciplinary/criminal proceedings, promotions from sealed covers should be made with reference to the junior's promotion date, and the decision on arrears of pay for notional promotion must be taken by the appointing authority with recorded reasons if denied

This OM was tested and elaborated upon by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Union of India vs. K.V. Janakiraman, AIR 1991 SC 2010, which held that completely exonerated employees are entitled to retrospective promotion with notional pay and arrears from the junior's promotion date, and that authorities denying arrears must record specific reasons

The Court found that the applicant failed to prove his junior, Sri Anup Kumar Nayak, was promoted to CCF precisely from the DPC date of 12.08.2011, noting the notification dated 23.02.2012 did not specify this

Given the applicant had been retrospectively promoted to CCF from 23.02.2012 (the date his junior was promoted) and notionally promoted to Addl. PCCF from 05.02.2016 (the date his junior Sri S.K.Acharya was promoted), the prayers relating to retrospective promotions themselves were deemed infructuous

However, the Court observed that the promotion orders were silent on back wages, and no documents regarding pay fixation for retrospective promotion were produced

Applying the principles from K.V. Janakiraman and the DoP&T OM, the Court determined that the respondents had a legal obligation to take a decision on back wages and, if denied, to record specific reasons for such denial, which had not been done

The Court directed the respondents to take a decision on the issue of back wages for the applicant's retrospective promotions, in accordance with the law laid down in K.V. Janakiraman and the DoP&T OM, and to intimate the applicant of the result within 90 days.

This specifically entails recording reasons if arrears of salary or any part thereof are denied

The OA was disposed of with this observation and direction