Govt Or Any Other Department To Face Adverse Consequences If It’s Lethargic In Considering Claim Of Govt Servant: Kerala HC
The Kerala High Court has warned that the Government or any other department shall face adverse consequences if the same is lethargic in considering claim of the Government Servant.
The Court was deciding an Original Petition relating to a case highlighting the difficulties faced by an academician entangled in bureaucratic delays affecting his career progression.
A Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice P.M. Manoj said, “If the Government or any other department is lethargic in considering the legitimate claim of a Government servant, that must face adverse consequences carrying restitutional benefits.”
Senior Government Pleader (SGP) Nisha Bose appeared for the Petitioners while Advocate A. Aruna appeared for the Respondent.
Factual Background -
The Respondent was a Professor in Electronics and Communication Engineering, whose promotion was due to take effect in 2003, but was only granted notional promotion in 2009. He sought relief from the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (KAT) which ruled in his favour and confirmed his entitlement to the promotion and financial benefits. Being aggrieved by this, the State preferred an Appeal but the Tribunal’s decision was upheld. Resultantly, the State was before the High Court.
The High Court after hearing the arguments from both sides, observed, “The question which will have to be addressed in this case is based on constitutional principles rather than statutory provisions. If a Government servant is arbitrarily denied due promotion, that would amount to acknowledging arbitrariness on the part of the Department or the Government as the case may be. One of the facets of Article 14 of the Constitution is equal treatment of all citizens under equal circumstances.”
The Court added that, merely because the Respondent happened to be a Government servant and is governed by statutory provisions, he cannot be denied Constitutional protection as against arbitrariness.
“Annexure A10 Government order signifies that, without any reason the respondent has been denied promotion in the year 2003. The Tribunal or the Court in such a situation has to respond to the claim under Article 14 and not with reference to any statutory provision governing service conditions”, it further noted.
The Court concluded that the statutory provisions governing monetary benefits attached to promotion have no application in a matter like this. It added that this monetary benefit was a legitimate claim that was denied arbitrarily on account of bureaucratic delay.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Original Petition and upheld the impugned Order.
Cause Title- State of Kerala & Ors. v. Jayakrishnaraj G. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KER:85251)
