MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Odisha High Court Upholds Principle of Seniority in Promotions, Quashes Impugned Communication: Seniority Takes Precedence Over Eligibility

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent decision, the Odisha High Court, led by Justice Sashikanta Mishra, has quashed an impugned communication regarding the promotion of Deputy Conservators of Forests in the Forest Department, Government of Odisha. The Court’s judgment, delivered on November 10, emphasized the supremacy of seniority over eligibility criteria in promotional exercises.

The petitioners, senior members of the Forest Department, had challenged the proposed promotion of their juniors based on the eligibility criterion under Rule 5 of the Odisha Forest Service Group-A (Senior) (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2015, which mandates five years of continuous service in the grade of OFS Group-A (Junior Branch). The petitioners argued that this ignored their inherent seniority, which should be the paramount consideration.

Justice Mishra, in his ruling, asserted, “As between the question of seniority and the eligibility criteria, this Court is of the view that the former shall take precedence over the latter.” He further noted, “This would be entirely contrary to the principle of equality enshrined under Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India.”

The Court’s decision has been hailed as a significant affirmation of the principles of fairness and equality in government service promotions. By quashing the impugned communication, the Court has directed the authorities to take necessary steps to fill up the posts in the promotional cadre in accordance with the observations made in the judgment.

Legal experts view this judgment as a critical precedent in ensuring that promotions in public services respect the seniority of employees, thereby maintaining the delicate balance between constitutional equality and affirmative action.

The case had seen robust representation from both sides, with senior advocates and legal counsels arguing fervently on the nuances of eligibility versus seniority and the implications of reservation in promotions. This judgment is expected to have wide-reaching implications in the administrative processes of government departments, particularly in regards to promotion policies.

Date of Decision: 10.11.2023.

Prakash Chandra Das and others VS State of Odisha and others         

Latest Legal News