Promotion Can Be Deferred If Disciplinary Appeal Is Pending: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that an employee does not acquire an indefeasible right to promotion merely by securing a high position in the merit list, and that promotion can be legitimately deferred if a statutory disciplinary appeal is pending consideration.

Dismissing a writ petition filed by a senior employee of the West Bengal Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. (WBSIDCL), Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee ruled that the Selection Committee was justified in keeping the petitioner's promotion in abeyance until the disciplinary proceedings reached their logical conclusion.

The Court observed that a statutory appeal is a continuation of disciplinary proceedings and that granting promotion during its pendency could undermine administrative discipline and public interest.

“Consideration of promotion during the pendency of the statutory appeal… may legitimately be kept in abeyance,” the Court held.

Background

The petitioner, an Assistant Manager-II, had been penalised in 2018 following disciplinary proceedings. Though the penalty was revoked in 2020 by an order passed by the Executive Director, the Board of Directors later found that the Executive Director had no jurisdiction to act as the Appellate Authority under the applicable Staff Regulations. Consequently, the Board recalled the order and directed a fresh hearing of the appeal by a retired Judge.

In 2022, when promotions to the post of Assistant Manager-I were considered, the petitioner secured the highest position in the merit list. However, the Selection Committee deferred his promotion citing “public interest” and the pendency of the disciplinary appeal. Meanwhile, the next empanelled candidate was promoted.

Challenging this, the petitioner contended that since the penalty had earlier been revoked, there was no subsisting disciplinary proceeding against him and that the deferment of his promotion violated Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution.

Court's Reasoning

The High Court rejected the petitioner's contentions, holding that the earlier appellate order revoking the penalty was void as it had been passed by an authority lacking jurisdiction. Since the statutory appeal had not been decided by the competent authority, it remained pending in the eyes of law.

The Court emphasised that promotion is not an automatic or vested right, especially when disciplinary proceedings are alive.

“A statutory appeal is a continuation of the disciplinary process. Until such proceedings attain finality, the employer is well within its rights to defer promotion,” the Court observed.

The Bench further held that administrative authorities are duty-bound to ensure institutional discipline and probity, and cannot be compelled to grant promotion merely on the basis of merit ranking when unresolved disciplinary issues subsist.

Rejecting the allegation of arbitrariness, the Court held that the Selection Committee's decision was neither mala fide nor unreasonable. It was taken in the interest of the organisation and to avoid complications that could arise if the appeal were ultimately decided against the petitioner.

The writ petition was thus dismissed. The Court upheld both the Board's decision to recall the defective appellate order and direct a fresh hearing, and, the Selection Committee's decision to keep the petitioner's promotion in abeyance.

Case Title: Debanjan Guha v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case Number: WPA 21881 of 2022

Click here to read order