High Court of Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 WPS No. 80 of 2024 RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.07.05 12:44:47 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 2025:CGHC:30489-DB NAFR WPS No. 80 of 2024 1 - Smt. Smriti Norge W/o Dilip Kumar Khare Aged About 39 Years Investigator In The Department Of Econimic And Statistics Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Ajay Lahri S/o Radheshyam Lahri Aged About 40 Years Investigator In The Department Of Economic And Statistics Directorate, Posted At District Office, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Arti Vatti W/o S.R. Vatti Aged About 36 Years Investigator In The Department Of Ecominic And Statistics Directorate, Posted At District Office, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Smt. Jyoti Sahu W/o S.K. Sahu Aged About 31 Years Investigator In The Department Of Economic And Statistics Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Vijay Pratap Singh Thakur S/o R. S. Thakur Aged About 41 Years Investigator In The Department Of Economic And Statistics Directorate, Posted At District Office, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Smt. Shilpa Soni W/o Mukund Soni Aged About 38 Years Investigator In The Department Of Economic And Statistics Directorate, Posted At District Office, Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.) 7 - Sunayana Dewangan W/o Chetan Dilliwar Aged About 37 Years Investigator In The Department Of Economic And Statistics Directorate, Posted At District Office, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 WPS No. 80 of 2024 8 - Kirti Netam S/o Harbansh Netam Aged About 38 Years Investigator In The Department Of Economic And Statistics Directorate, Posted At District Office, North Bastar Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 9 - Harbansh Koshle S/o Jayant Das Koshle Aged About 41 Years Investigator In The Department Of Economic And Statistics Directorate, Posted At District Office, Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) 10 - Ashwani Kumar Bhuarya S/o Pal Singh Bhuarya Aged About 41 Years Investigator In The Department Of Economic And Statistics Directorate, Posted At District Office, Balod, District Balod (C.G.) versus Petitioner(s) 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Economic And Statistics, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Department Of Economice And Statistics Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners
Legal Reasoning
It is well settled that while promotion is a normal incidence of service and not a fundamental right, but an employee has a right to be considered for promotion. In Union of India and others v. Krishna Kumar and others1, their Lordships of the Supreme Court have clearly held that there is no vested right to promotion, but a right be considered for promotion in accordance with the Rules which prevail on the date on which consideration for promotion takes place, and observed in paragraphs 10, 11 & 12 as under: - 1 (2019) 4 SCC 319 7 WPS No. 80 of 2024 “10. In considering the rival submissions, it must, at the outset, be noted that it is well settled that there is no vested right to promotion, but a right be considered for promotion in accordance with the Rules which prevail on the date on which consideration for promotion takes place. This Court has held that there is no rule of universal application to the effect that vacancies must necessarily be filled in on the basis of the law which existed on the date when they arose. The decision of this Court in Y.V. Rangaiah v. J. Sreenivasa Rao2 has been construed in subsequent decisions as a case where the applicable Rules required the process of promotion or selection to be completed within a stipulated time-frame. Hence, it has been held in H.S. Grewal v. Union of India3 that the creation of an intermediate post would not amount to an interference with the vested right to promotion. A two-Judge Bench of this Court held thus: (H.S. Grewal case, SCC p. 769, para 13) “13. … Such an introduction of an intermediate post does not, in our opinion, amount to interfering with any vested rights cannot be interfered with, is to be accepted as correct. What all has happened here is that an intermediate post has been created prospectively for future promotions from Group B Class II to Group A Class I. If, before these Rules of 1981 came into force, these officers were eligible to be directly promoted as Commandants under the 1974 Rules but before they got any such promotions, the 1981 Rules came in obliging them to
Arguments
: Mr. T.K. Jha and Mr. Amir Khan, Advocate For State : Mr. Y.S. Thakur, Addl. AG Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per, Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge 04/07/2025 Heard. 1. The petitioners in the present Writ Petition has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records relating to this case. 3 WPS No. 80 of 2024 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and declare the Rule 13 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Economics and Statistics Class-III (Executive) Service Recruitment Rules, 1990 relating to promotion of ministerial staff to the post of ASO by limited competitive examination as unconstitutional and liable to be set-aside, the interest of justice. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and set-aside the letter dated 30/05/2022 (Annexure-P/2). 10.4 That, any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper together with cost of the petition. “ 2. (a) Case of the petitioners is that the petitioners were directly appointed on the post of Invesigator in the grade pay of Rs. 2800/- per month through the examination conducted by the Vyapam in the year 2013-14. Their next post for promotion is Assistant Statics officers. According to them, for promotion to the post of Assistant Statistics Officers, 40% is to be filled by director recruitment, 50% is to be filled from promotion from executive officers and 10% is to be filled from ministerial staff through limited competitive exam. (b) According to the learned counsel for the petitioners the impugned Rules i.e. Madhya Pradesh Economics and Statistics Class- III (Executive) Service Recruitment Rules, 1989 (sic 1990) which was published in the official Gazette 26/01/1990 (For short ‘the Rules of 1989’), provides that Assistant Grade-III (grade pay Rs. 1900/- and A.G.- II grade pay Rs. 2400/-) have ben permitted to appear for the post of Assistant Statistics Officer, Investigator and Data Entry Operator (grade pay Rs. 4300/-, Rs. 2800/- & Rs. 2400/-, respectively) through limited competitive exam with certain educational 4 WPS No. 80 of 2024 qualification and experience in the Rule, 13 of the Rules, 1989. (c) According to the learned counsel, it is a basic principle of service jurisprudence that promotion by limited competitive exam can be given only for the next higher post and not for two or three above rank post. The petitioners herein were appointed on the grade pay of Rs. 2800/- and their next higher post is Assistant Statistics Officer Grade Pay Rs. 4300/-, Whereas, AG-III & AG-II (Grade Pay Rs. 1900 & Rs. 2400/-) have also been allowed to get promotion for post of Assistant Statistics Officer (Grade pay of Rs. 4300/-) through limited competitive exam which is three and above to their present post/scale. To buttress his contention, learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment passed in the matter of Pavnesh Kumar v. Union of India & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 3641/2023, decided on 28/11/2023) by the Apex Court. Thus, the impugned Rules 1989 be declared as Unconstitutional and the same be set-aside. 3. (i) Learned counsel appearing for the State ex-adverso, would submit that the petitioners are working as Investigators in the department of Economic and Statistics Directorate. According to Schedule IV of the Chhattisgarh Economics and Statistics Class III (Executive) Service Recruitment Rules, 1989 the next promotional post for the post of Investigator/ Field Investigator/ Block Level Investigator is that of Assistant Statistical Officer. (ii) Learned counsel would submit that according to the Rules of 1989, 40% posts of Assistant Statistical Officer is to be filled by direct 5 WPS No. 80 of 2024 recruitment, while 50% of the posts of Assistant Statistical Officer is to be filled by promotion of the members of the services and 10% of the post is to be filled by members of Ministerial service through limited competitive exam. Rule 13 of the Rules, 1989 provides for direct recruitment by selection through limited competitive examination of the ministerial employees on the post of Assistant Statistical Officer/ Investigator/Field Investigator/ Block Level Investigator/ Computer. The petitioners are basically aggrieved by Rule 13 of the Rules of 1989 which provides for direct recruitment by selection through limited competitive examination. The petitioners seem to be aggrieved by Rule 13 of the Rules of 1989 on the ground that the juniors to the petitioners or the persons holding lower post than the petitioners, get an opportunity to be appointed on a higher post through limited competitive examination. (iii) According to the learned counsel the Chhattisgarh Economics and Statistics Class-III (Executive) Service Recruitment Rules, 1989 were framed in the year 1989 and notified in January, 1990. The petitioners while entering the services in the Department of Economics and Statistics were well aware of the service conditions and their avenues of the promotion. The Rules have been enforced for more than 30 years and has been long standing. Since the petitioners were well aware of the Rules and avenues of promotions and had entered the services with all open eyes, they cannot turn back and challenge the provisions claiming it to be arbitrary or unconstitutional. He would 6 WPS No. 80 of 2024 submit that reduction in changes of promotion, if any, on account of change or amendment in the Rules would not effect the fundamental rights of the petitioners as the Govt. servant has only a right to be considered for promotions in accordance with the relevant Rules and therefore, the challenge made by the petitioners in the present petition is not tenable and the same is liable to be dismissed. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings. 5. Whether an employee has a right to be promoted or not depends on the statutory rules governing his service or the terms of the contract of service or executive instructions as the case may be. If the rules or the contract of service etc. provide or indicate that promotion is to be made on an assessment of the merits of the candidate, then the candidate has only a right to be considered for promotion as distinguished from the right to be promoted. 6.