The judgments are about service law governing promotion in service. An employee is not entitled to a retrospective formation because of a mere vacancy. In matters of reservation in promotion, respective states may assess the inadequacy in the representation of the backward classes.
?Whether the proportion of the population of SCs and STs to the population of India should be the test for determining the adequacy of representation in promotional posts for the purposes of Article 16(4A)?
Will the mere existence of a vacancy create a right in favour of an employee for retrospective promotion?
The Supreme Court has held that it is for the State to assess how inadequate the representation of SCs and STs in promotional posts is by taking into account relevant factors. Relevant factors such as equity, justice, and efficiency are different for every case and must be identified and counter-balanced depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case.
The Supreme Court observed that the mere existence of vacancy per se will not create a right in favour of an employee for retrospective promotion. The promotion to a post should only be granted from the date of promotion and not from the date on which a vacancy has arisen.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL/INHERENT JURISDICTION
Civil Appeal No. 629 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 30621 of 2011)
Jarnail Singh & Ors. …..Appellant (s)
Versus
Lachhmi Narain Gupta & Ors. …..Respondent (s)
JUDGEMENT
L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.
1. Leave granted (except Diary No.38895/2017).
2. Reservation of 27 per cent in favour of backward classes was the subject matter of dispute in Indra Sawhney & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.1. This Court was of the opinion that Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India does not provide for reservation in the matter of promotions. It was clarified that the judgment shall have prospective operation and shall not affect the promotions already made, whether made on regular or on any other basis. Reservation provided in the matter of promotions in the Central services or State services were directed to be continued for a period of five years from the date of the judgment.
Download complete judgement by clicking on the button given below >>
The judgments discuss Service Law and Article 16(4A) of the Constitution. According to Art. 16(4A):
“Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for reservation in matters of promotion, with consequential seniority, to any class or classes of posts in the services under the State in favour of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes which, in the opinion of the State, are not adequately represented in the services under the State.”
Promotion can be a complicated legal matter as it is governed by the service rules of a particular organization and may also be a constitutional matter in some cases. A government employee involved in a case related to promotion or reservation in promotion is bound to require assistance from an expert lawyer. Such matters are too particular to deal with and demand the expertise of labour and service lawyers well-versed with the intricacies of promotion.
669+ Lawyers are online 
