RATAN SINGH RAJPUT Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, grievance is made with regard to the order dated 7/12/2011 by which petitioner has been promoted as Assistant Director, Industry in the pay scale of Rs. 15,600 -39100+Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/ - w.e.f. 1/1/2008, but petitioner stood retired on 30th April, 2008, and relates to non -payment of salary for the period from 1/1/2008 to 30/4/2008 on the principle of 'no work no pay'; however, petitioner has been given the benefit of notional fixation w.e.f. 1/1/2008 on the promotional post. It is submitted that for no fault on the part of the petitioner he has been denied promotion on the aforesaid post of Assistant Director despite having eligibility for being promoted and due to inaction on the part of respondents, the same was denied on due date. Under such circumstances, petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing writ petition No. 985/2010 in which this Court vide order dated 31/3/2011, had directed respondents to decide petitioner's representation as regard his grievance of non -promotion to the post of Assistant Director on the date he was due to be promoted. It is submitted that it is only after the order was passed by this Court on 31/3/2011, the respondents galvanized their machinery for expediting the matter of promotion of petitioner. Under such circumstances, the denial of payment to the petitioner on the principle of 'no work no pay' for the period from 1/1/2008 to 30/4/2008 violates the equality clause as enshrined under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that petitioner was precluded from discharging his duties primarily for delay caused in according promotion in time. With the aforesaid submission, the prayer is made to direct the respondent to make payment of salary of promotional post for the period 1/1/2008 to 30/4/2008.

(2.) STATE counsel has supported the order passed by the authorities. It is submitted that petitioner is not entitled for the relief as claimed on the premise that petitioner does not have any right to be promoted, he has only right to be considered for promotion and no sooner did the vacancy come into existence, petitioner was accorded benefit of promotion to the post of Assistant Director, Industry.

(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.