Director General, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) vs. J.K. Prashar
Background
This case arose from a dispute over promotions within the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). J.K. Prashar (respondent no. 1) challenged the promotion of two other employees (respondent nos. 2 and 3) to the post of Under Secretary, arguing that their elevation violated the CSIR Administrative Services (Recruitment & Promotion) Rules, 1982. The Punjab and Haryana High Court accepted Prashar’s writ petition, reversed the promotions of respondents 2 and 3, and directed that only eligible candidates be considered as per the statutory rules. The High Court also dismissed CSIR’s review petition against this order.
Key Issues
Whether the promotions of respondent nos. 2 and 3 to the post of Under Secretary were in violation of the statutory recruitment and promotion rules.
Whether J.K. Prashar was eligible for promotion and whether the High Court was correct in reversing the promotions.
Supreme Court’s Analysis
The Supreme Court noted that the relevant statutory rules required that promotions to the post of Under Secretary be made from among Section Officers who had been formally appointed and had fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The Court found that respondents 2 and 3 had only served as Section Officers “on attachment” and were never formally appointed to the post. In contrast, Prashar had been formally appointed as Section Officer, a fact not disputed by CSIR in its reply before the High Court.
CSIR argued that the promotion was based on merit and that Prashar was not graded as “Good,” unlike respondents 2 and 3, who were graded as “Very Good.” The Supreme Court, however, held that since respondents 2 and 3 were ineligible for promotion under the statutory rules, the question of merit grading did not arise. The High Court’s interference with their promotions was thus justified.
Judgment and Outcome
The Supreme Court dismissed CSIR’s appeal, upholding the High Court’s decision to reverse the promotions of respondents 2 and 3. The Court clarified that its adjudication was confined to the facts of this particular case and should not be treated as a precedent for future cases. It also noted that Prashar had retired during the pendency of the litigation.
Significance
This judgment reinforces the principle that promotions in public service must strictly adhere to statutory rules and eligibility criteria. It also clarifies that administrative actions in violation of such rules are subject to judicial review and correction. The Supreme Court’s decision upholds transparency, fairness, and rule of law in service matters within public institutions.
RELATED Blog
0 comments