Officers Of Central Health Services Can’t Be Promoted Mechanically Solely On Basis Of Number Of Years Of Service: Delhi High Court

In 2006 and 2007, the petitioners along with other Associate Professors were considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for promotion to the post of Professors under the DACP Scheme. In an order passed by the DPC, the petitioners’ names were left out in the list of Associate Professors who had been promoted to the post of Professor.

The petitioners challenged this order before CAT, which dismissed their applications in 2008. They then approached the high court the same year.

The division bench said the order passed by Tribunal makes it very clear that the case of the petitioners were considered for promotion in 2006 and 2007 under the DACP Scheme but they did not have two “Very Good” gradings in their ACRs during the past last five years of their service and thus were not promoted.

The court also noted that the petitioners were once again considered for promotion, and they were found fit by the DPC. Thus, in the year 2008, they were promoted to the post of Professors as they had met the eligibility criteria.

Observing that DACP Scheme makes it very clear that promotions are to be made without linkage to vacancies, the court said other conditions for effectuating promotions are to be governed by provisions of CHS Rules 1996 – as amended from time to time, and instructions issued by the DoP&T.

"It was the aforesaid criterion which was required to be considered for the purpose of promotion and considering suitability of an employee for the same under the DACP Scheme. It was a uniform criterion which was made applicable to all employees, including the Petitioners. Since the Petitioners did not have two “Very Good” gradings in their ACRs during the last five years of their service, the Petitioners had not been promoted to the next higher post," said the bench.

The court observed that once the cases of the petitioners were considered as per the DACP Scheme, and they were not able to fulfill the eligibility criterion for promotion, the question of grant of relief to the Petitioners does not arise. 

"This Court is not able to find any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the Ld. CAT. By no stretch of imagination can it be construed that under the DACP Scheme, an employee/ Associate Professor is entitled to be upgraded to the post of a Professor irrespective of his/her grading in the ACR, in a mechanical manner. There can never be a mechanical manner of upgradation, de hors the Recruitment Rules and other relevant provisions governing promotions in service, solely on the basis of completion of number of years of service," it added.

Case Title: Dr. Shilpi Agarwal & Anr. versus UOI & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 21

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. V. K. Garg, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sagar Saxena, Mr. K. S. Rekhi, Mr. Parv Garg, Mr. Pawas Kulshrestha and Mr. Parmeet Singh, Advocates

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Gogna, CGSC with Ms. Priya Singh, Advocate for Respondent/ UOI. Dr. Vikrant Narayan Vasudeva, Mr. Sarthak Chiller and Mr. Rohit Lohav, Advocates for Respondent No.5.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment