Police Constable Must Be Considered for Promotion Retroactively Where Earlier Punishment Was Set Aside

A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran heard an appeal by a Tamil Nadu police constable challenging denial of consideration for promotion to Sub‑Inspector under the in‑service departmental quota. The principal issue concerned whether a past departmental punishment—which had been subsequently set aside—could lawfully disentitle the appellant from being considered for promotion in 2019.

The Court allowed the appeal, granted leave and directed that the appellant be considered for promotion as if the impugned denial had not occurred; if found eligible on fresh consideration, the appellant was to be promoted from 2019 with consequential benefits. The Court noted that the denial was founded on a punishment imposed in 2005 which the government had set aside in 2009, and held that the appellant therefore could not have been disentitled from consideration a decade later. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “The appellant was proceeded against both departmentally and under the criminal law for allegedly having beaten up a colleague when they were posted in a check post. After duty, some dispute arose between them and there was a brawl in which the other constable was injured. This led to a criminal case being lodged in which he was arrested but later acquitted. The departmental proceedings though entered in the finding of guilt with resultant punishment imposed, the same was set aside in 2009 by the Government as is evidenced from Annexure P/4. In such circumstances, the appellant could not have been disentitled from a consideration in the year 2019. The writ petition was also filed in the year 2019. In the above circumstances we are of the opinion that the appellant must be considered for promotion, dehors any disentitlement due to his having become overaged. The consideration will be made and if found eligible, he shall be promoted from 2019 and consequential benefits also shall be paid to him, since it was not his fault that the authority denied his consideration for promotion based on a punishment which had already been set aside. It is trite that the employee has no right to be promoted but has a right to be considered, when selections for promotions are carried out, unless disqualified; which right has been impinged, unjustly, in the above case.”

Background The appellant, appointed as a Police Constable on 01.03.2002, applied for consideration under the 20% departmental quota for promotion to Sub‑Inspector when a notification issued in 2019. By Annexure P/8 dated 13.04.2019 the Superintendent of Police denied consideration on the ground that the appellant had earlier been subjected to a punishment of postponement of next increment for one year without cumulative effect, imposed on 09.05.2005. The appellant contended that the departmental punishment had been set aside by the Government on 27.11.2009 (Annexure P/4) and that the criminal case arising from the same incident had ended in acquittal. He challenged the denial by filing a writ petition in 2019 and thereafter approached this Court by special leave. The State relied on the existence of the earlier punishment to deny consideration; the appellant relied on the subsequent setting aside of the punishment and on his acquittal in criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court found that denial of consideration on the basis of a punishment already annulled was unjustified, reminded that an employee had no absolute right to promotion but did have a right to be considered unless disqualified, and directed fresh consideration without regard to over‑age resulting from the delay. The appeal stood allowed, and pending applications were disposed of.

Case No.: CA @ SLP (C) No. 30700 of 2024 Case Title: P. Sakthi v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and Ors. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Not indicated For the Respondent(s): Not indicated