Romail Singh v. Union of India

1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the relief that he should be granted promotion because juniors to him have been granted promotion.

2. The present writ petition is totally bereft of a legal cause of action because there is no law that a person has to be promoted because juniors below to him have been promoted. The legal cause of action to succeed in promotion is to plead (and substantiate) as to which is the promotion post, what are the qualifying criteria for being promoted to the higher post, how the petitioner satisfies the eligibility criteria for being promoted to the higher post, whether the post is an 2017:DHC:777 automatic promotion post or a selection post, if the post is a selection post then which is the DPC which had to consider the petitioner for promotion but did not consider him or if petitioner was considered then why the DPC decision should be quashed because petitioner has wrongly not been promoted etc etc. There is however not even a whisper of a legal cause of action in terms of the aforesaid requirements of a writ petition in this writ petition by which the petitioner would seek promotion to a higher post.

3. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be and is accordingly dismissed for completely lacking the pleadings and substantiation of a legal cause of action to seek promotion and more so more promotions than one as claimed, as none of the requirements of the legal causes of action of promotions to one or more higher posts are stated in the writ petition and as to how the petitioner complies with the requirements of promotion(s) with the aspect that if the posts were selection posts then petitioner only had a right to be considered and nothing further.

4. A reading of the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent no.4/National Hydroelectric Power Corporation/employer shows that petitioner was not promoted from the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) to the higher post because petitioner did not even satisfy the requirements for being appointed as an Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) inasmuch as for this post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) petitioner needed a diploma in engineering discipline of three years but petitioner did not have a diploma in engineering but only had a certificate of proficiency of one year duration from the Central Water Commission, Govt. of India and on which basis, petitioner did not meet the qualifications for the next higher promotion post and even on the existing post being the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical). As already stated above, even for the post of Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) petitioner did not have the necessary qualifying criteria of a diploma in engineer discipline of three years.

5. In view of the above, there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is therefore dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

FEBRUARY 09,2017 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J ib