Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, an Aanganwadi worker, filed a writ petition under Articles 14 and 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to consider her application for promotion to the post of Supervisor/Mukhya Sevika and to include her name in the list. During the pendency of the petition, she was nominated to the post of Mukhya Sevika (Class-III) on 26.09.2016. The only question before the court was whether she was entitled to be appointed to that post with effect from 2010. The petitioner argued that prior to 2010, seniority was considered unit-wise, and one Parmar Urmilaben Vashrambhai from her center was nominated but her appointment was cancelled as she was not qualified. The petitioner, being a scheduled caste candidate, claimed she was the only eligible candidate and should have been promoted in 2010. The respondents contended that the petitioner was not eligible in 2010 as she did not possess the required qualifications and that the seniority list was not challenged. The court held that the petitioner had no right to claim retrospective promotion, as she was not eligible at the relevant time and the seniority list was not under challenge. The petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Promotion - Retrospective Promotion - Petitioner sought promotion to Mukhya Sevika post from 2010 but was promoted in 2016 during pendency of petition - Court held that promotion cannot be granted retrospectively as petitioner was not eligible in 2010 and seniority list was not challenged - Held that no vested right to retrospective promotion exists (Paras 3-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to be appointed to the post of Mukhya Sevika (Class-III) with effect from 2010, given that she was promoted during the pendency of the petition in 2016.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner was promoted in 2016 and no case for retrospective promotion from 2010 is made out.
Law Points
- Promotion cannot be claimed retrospectively
- seniority list not challenged
- no vested right to promotion
- writ of mandamus not maintainable for retrospective promotion
