The Supreme Court of India, in Civil Appeal No. 6977 of 2015 filed by the Bihar State Electricity Board, addressed the issue of retrospective promotion. The case arose from a dispute where the respondent, a physically challenged Scheduled Caste officer, claimed his promotion to the post of Joint Secretary should be backdated to 1997 instead of the actual promotion date in 2003. The Court highlighted that the right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right but not the promotion itself. It also emphasized that seniority cannot be granted retrospectively from a date when the employee was not in the cadre, nor when there was no vacancy.

1. Background:

• Appellant: Bihar State Electricity Board.
• Respondent: A physically challenged officer belonging to the Scheduled Caste category.
• Issue: Whether the respondent's promotion should be effective from 1997, when the vacancy arose, or from 2003, the date of actual promotion.

2. Factual Matrix:

• Appointments and Promotions: The respondent was appointed as Lower Division Assistant in 1976, and subsequently received several promotions, culminating in his promotion to Joint Secretary in 2003.
• Promotion Dispute: The respondent claimed his promotion to Joint Secretary should have been backdated to 1997 when the vacancy arose.

3. Legal Proceedings:

• Single Judge Ruling: The respondent's plea for backdating the promotion was rejected.
• Division Bench Ruling: Overturned the Single Judge's decision, directing the Board to grant retrospective promotion from 1997.
• Supreme Court: The Board challenged the Division Bench's decision.

4. Legal Arguments:

• Appellant's Position: Promotion eligibility (Kal Awadhi) does not imply automatic promotion; it only allows consideration for promotion when a vacancy arises.
• Respondent's Position: Claimed entitlement to promotion from 1997, citing seniority, disability, and reservation status.

5. Court’s Analysis:

• Right to Promotion: The Court reaffirmed that while employees have the right to be considered for promotion, they do not have an absolute right to be promoted.
• Seniority and Vacancy: Retrospective seniority or promotion cannot be granted from a date when no vacancy existed or when the employee was not yet part of the cadre.
• Previous Judgments Cited: The Court cited several precedents, including Ajit Singh vs. State of Punjab and Nirmal Chandra Sinha vs. Union of India, reinforcing that promotions are effective from the date they are granted.

6. Conclusion:

• Supreme Court Ruling: The appeal by the Bihar State Electricity Board was allowed, and the Division Bench's direction for retrospective promotion from 1997 was set aside. The Court held that promotions must be based on the availability of a vacancy and the actual date of promotion, not on the date when eligibility is first met.