The Tribunal dismissed applications seeking to quash an order withdrawing a 'deemed-date' promotion. It held the respondent was not eligible for the retrospective benefit as he did not meet the recruitment rules requirements for the relevant cadre on the crucial date and authorized a correction through a Review DPC.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
1
Central Administrative Tribunal Mumbai Bench : Camp at Nagpur
OA No.2100 of 2020 With OA No.2101 of 2020 OA No.2102 of 2020
Orders reserved on : 09.09.2026
Orders pronounced on : 11.09.2026
Hon’ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J) Hon’ble Mr. Braj Mohan Agrawal, Member (A)
OA No.2100 of 2020
Gopal Khanal Chhet r i, Aged about 49 years, Occu: Accountant, R / o New Yerkheda, Near Kosambi Budh V ihar, Post: Kamptee, Tah Kamptee, Distt. N agpur. PIN-441 002. Office: O/0 the Acco u ntant General Accounts & Entitlenments)-ll, N a gpur. (By Advocate : Shri P .S. Verma)
….Applicant
Versus
(By Advocate : Shri B haskar D. Pandit)
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
2
OA No.2101 of 2020
Mahesh Subhash Is h i (Nhavi), aged about 40 years, Occu: Accountant, R / o. C.P.W.D. Colony, Bungalow-17, Type-l , Room No.10, Telangkhedi, Civil Lines, Nagpur- 4 40001. Office: O/0. the Acc o untant General (Accounts & Entitlements)-II, Na g pur.
(By Advocate : Shri P .S. Verma)
….Applicant
Versus
… . Respondents
(By Advocate : Shri B haskar D. Pandit)
OA No.2102 of 2020
Rajkumar Mahasing h Yadav, aged about 39 years Occu: Accountant, R / o CPWD Colony, AGMP Quarters Type-I|, Q u arter No.2, Katol Road. Nagpur-440013. Office: O/0. the Acc o untant General Accounts & Entitlements)-lI, Na g pur. (By Advocate : Shri P .S. Verma)
….Applicant
Versus
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
3
(By Advocate : Shri B haskar D. Pandit)
O R D E R
Hon’ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J):
Since the issue s involved in all the captioned OAs are identical and the reliefs soug h t therein are also identical, and wit h the consent of learned counsels for the parties, we proceed to disp o se of all the three OAs by this c o mmon Order. For the purpose of t his common order, OA No. 2100 of 2020 is being treated as the lead c ase.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
4 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
No.HRM-2/ L evah/Vetan Visangati/Prabh/561 dat e d 31-072020 issue d by the Respondent No.1 ( Annex.A-4 ), by declaring th a t the same are issued not in accord a nce with law/rules a n d violative of Articles 14, 16 and 311 ( 2) of the Constitution of India as also against the Indian A udit and Accounts (A c countant) Recruitment Rules, 1986 ( Annex.A21 );
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
5 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
3.1 On being promoted as Clerk, an official has to c o mplete three years regular service in the cadre for his next promotion a s Accountant in seniority quota. A s the applicant was already prom o ted as Clerk under seniority qu o ta w.e.f. 01.04.2015, he was no t eligible for promotion as Accountant in the panel year 2016-17 un d er Graduate (Group D) Multi- T asking Staff quota and, therefo r e, was not considered for prom o tion as Accountant. His juniors in M ulti-Tasking Staff cadre, who had also passed DE for Accountants Exa m ination and who were not pro m oted as Clerk in the panel year 2 015-16 were considered for pro m otion as Accountant under Examina t ion quota in the panel year 2016- 1 7. The applicant had represented to promote him with effect from 01.04.2016, the day on which his juni o rs in MultiTasking Staff cadre w ere promoted as Accountant under Examination quota. Therefore, th e matter was referred to CAG office f or guidance. In the meantime, as p er orders a Review DPC was convened to address the issue. As per orders of Review Departmenta l Promotion Committee, Office O rder No.216 dated 30.08.2018, the a pplicant was reverted to the po s t of Multi-Tasking Staff for the period from 01.04.2015 to 31.03. 2 016 and was given deemed date pro m otion to the post of Accountant w .e.f. 01.04.2016, the day on which h is juniors in Multi-Tasking Staf f cadre were promoted as Acco u ntant under Examination quota. His inter-se-seniority was also re s tored in the cadre of Accountant. The benefit of deemed date promot i on was given
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
6 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
notionally with no arrears of Pay and allowances. T he applicant represented that he was put to financial loss and req u ested not to make any recovery f or the period of reversion to Multi- T asking Staff. He had also conten d ed that he was entitled to get pay a n d allowances to the post of Cler k , as he had worked as Clerk and t o the post of Accountant from de e m date of promotion i.e. 01.04.2016. Therefore, the matter of recov e ry of pay due to reversion to the post Multi1Tasking Staff was re f erred to CAG office for guidance. C A G office vide order dated 21.0 5 .2020 clarified that convening of Review Departmental Prom o tion Committee was not in order a nd the case does not qualify t he conditions as stipulated in D oP&T’s OM No.22013/1/97-Estt (D) dated 13.04.1998. The reversion of the official from Clerk to M u lti-Tasking Staff for further con s ideration to Accountant cadre w a s required to be done under own vo l ition. Even if reversion was under own volition, in terms of FR 15-A, he would have to be placed as j u nior most in Multi-Tasking Staff cadre to be considered for pro m otion to Accountant cadre prosp e ctively. CAG office further clarif i ed that consequent to reversion f r om Clerk to Multi-Tasking Staff , the pay drawn in Clerk cadre n eed not be recovered since he h ad discharged duty in that capacit y . In view of CAG office's clarification the Office Order No.HRMI/A&E/Promotion/216 dated 30.08.2018 due to Review D epartmental Promotion Committ e e stands null and void and, therefo r e, withdrawn
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
7 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
vide Office Order N o.HRM-I/A&E/Promotion/47 date d 22.06.2020 restoring prior to issue of order dated 30.08.2018 along with consequential effect. Hence this OA.
5.1 Learned cou n sel further submitted that Accountant posts under the Departmental E x amination quota became available in March 2016, and despite the app l icant being eligible and senior, his eight juniors
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
8 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
were promoted vid e order dated 30.03.2016, whereas t he applicant was ignored without being informed of the reason for hi s exclusion or being afforded any o pportunity to explain his position. Such action, according to lear n ed counsel, was arbitrary, cont r ary to the Recruitment Rules a n d violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14 and 16 of t he Constitution.
5.2 It was also s ubmitted that the subsequent rej e ction of the applicant's claim on the ground that he had already been promoted as Clerk and was, t h erefore, no longer eligible for promotion as Accountant from th e MTS cadre was wholly untenable. T he applicant had already complet e d three years and four months of r e gular service in the MTS cadre , and his eligibility for promotio n under the Departmental Examination quota had accrued indepen d ently under the applicable Recru i tment Rules.
5.3 Learned cou n sel argued that the Respondent N o.2, vide its clarificatory order d a ted 11.07.2016, had specifically dir e cted that the applicant could be c o nsidered for promotion to the Acc o untant cadre after his reversion t o the MTS cadre. Pursuant thereto, t he applicant was ultimately pro m oted as Accountant vide order date d 30.08.2018 with a deemed date o f 01.04.2016, i.e., the date from whi c h his juniors had been promoted , and his pay was also fixed accor d ingly. It was contended that thi s action had restored the applic a nt's rightful position vis-à-vis his juniors.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
9 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
5.4 Learned co u nsel further contended that th e re was no justification for sub s equently withdrawing the said pro m otion on the ground that the applicant had not sought reversion fro m the post of Clerk to the post of M TS under Fundamental Rule 15(a). According to the applicant, FR 15 ( a) had no application to the facts of the case, and requiring him to se e k reversion from a higher post to a lower post merely to secure co n sideration for promotion under the D epartmental Examination quota w as unwarranted. The applicant had, in any event, not objected to th e technical reversion directed pur s uant to the clarificatory order d a ted 11.07.2016.
5.5 It was furt h er submitted that the Responde n ts had, by misinterpreting th e applicable rules and repeat e dly seeking clarifications, unne c essarily complicated the applican t 's case and delayed his prom o tion for about two years, desp i te the first clarificatory order h aving been issued in his favour in 2016. The subsequent clarifica t ory order dated 21.05.2020, issued a fter a gap of nearly four years a n d resulting in withdrawal of the b e nefit already granted to the appl i cant, was alleged to be punitive, a rbitrary and unsustainable in law .
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
10 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
ignored while his ju n iors were promoted, which, accordin g to him, was violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution an d contrary to settled principles of s ervice jurisprudence.
5.7 Lastly, learn e d counsel submitted that the rej e ction of the applicant's claim fo r stepping up of pay with effect fro m 01.04.2016, when his juniors h ad been promoted from that da t e, was also unsustainable. Rel i ance was placed upon Funda m ental Rule 22(1)(a)(6) and the j udgment of the Hon'ble Supreme C o urt in High Court of Punjab and Haryana v. Bahadur Singh Batta in Civil Appeal No. 99 4 3 of 1995, decided on April 25, 2 0 01. Learned counsel, therefore, u r ged that the impugned orders be qu a shed and set aside and the applic a nt be granted all consequential bene f its, including the benefit of prom o tion to the post of Accountant wit h effect from 01.04.2016, at par w i th his juniors.
6.1 On merits, l e arned counsel submitted that duri n g the panel year 2015-16, vacan c ies were available in the cadre of Cl e rk and, since the applicant was el i gible, he was promoted to the post o f Clerk with effect from 01.04. 2 015, which constituted his first promotional
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
11 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
opportunity from th e post of MTS. Though the applicant h ad appeared in the Departmenta l Examination for Accountants in F e bruary 2015, prior to his promoti o n as Clerk, the result of the said exa m ination was declared only on 1 3 .05.2015, in which the applicant w as declared successful.
6.2 Learned cou n sel further submitted that the applicant was not eligible for conside r ation for promotion to the post o f Accountant under the Graduate MTS quota for the panel year 20 1 6-17, as the relevant cut-off dat e for eligibility was 01.04.2016. By t h at date, the applicant had alrea d y been promoted as Clerk and, t herefore, no longer belonged to the MTS cadre. His juniors who c ontinued to remain in the MTS cadre and fulfilled the eligibility co n ditions were accordingly conside r ed and promoted as Accountants o n 03.04.2016 under the Examination quota. Thus, according to the res p ondents, the applicant's non-con s ideration for promotion from the M T S cadre was in accordance with t h e applicable Recruitment Rules.
6.3 It was sub m itted that, upon receipt of th e applicant's representation date d 07.04.2016 seeking promotion a s Accountant with effect from 01. 0 4.2016, the matter was referred to t h e CAG office for guidance. The C AG, vide its communication date d 11.07.2016, advised that the ap p licant could be considered for pro m otion to the post of Accountant a f ter reversion to the MTS cadre, with his pay being
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
12 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
fixed at the stage at w hich it would have stood had he co n tinued in the MTS cadre. Since c e rtain doubts arose regarding imple m entation of the said directions, the matter was again referred to the CAG on 01.08.2016, followe d by reminders dated 17.07.2017 an d 01.03.2018. In the meantime, the applicant was promoted to the post of Accountant with effe c t from 02.04.2018 under the Senior i ty quota.
6.4 Learned cou n sel further submitted that, in order t o redress the grievance of the a pplicant, a Review Departmenta l Promotion Committee was con v ened and, pursuant to its recommen d ations dated 21.08.2018, Office O rder dated 30.08.2018 was issued, whereby the applicant was rever t ed to the MTS cadre and granted deemed-date promotion to the po s t of Accountant with effect from 01.04.2016, i.e., the date from whi c h his juniors had been promote d under the Examination quota. However, such deemed-date promo t ion was only notional and did not carry arrears of pay and allowances.
6.5 It was furth e r submitted that the CAG, vide it s subsequent clarification dated 13.09.2018, clarified that, under the extant Recruitment Rules, a Graduate MTS employee with three years' continuous service, w ho passed the Departmental Exam i nation could be considered for p r omotion as Accountant; similarly, a Clerk with three years' conti n uous service in the grade after passing the Departmental Exa m ination could also be considere d . Since the
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
13
applicant had alre a dy been promoted as Clerk with effect from 01.04.2015, he coul d be considered for promotion to th e Accountant cadre only after com p leting three years' service in the Cle r k cadre. The CAG further clarified that promotion under the Examination quota after reversion from C lerk to MTS was subject to availabil i ty of vacancy and could be grante d only prospectively.
6.6 Learned cou n sel submitted that, thereafter, o n a further reference, the CAG v i de its clarification dated 21.05.2020 held that the case did not fulfil t h e conditions prescribed in the DoP & T OM dated 13.04.1998 for conv e ning a Review DPC. It was clarified that reversion of the officials from Clerk to MTS was required to be o n their own volition under FR 15 - A and, upon such reversion, they wo u ld be placed as junior-most in the MTS cadre and could be considered for promotion to Acco u ntant prospectively, subject to a v ailability of vacancies and reco m mendation of the DPC. Accordi n gly, learned counsel contended t h at, since the Review DPC convene d in 2018 was not in accordance w ith the clarification issued by the C AG and the reversion of the appl i cant from Clerk to MTS had not bee n made on his own volition, the o r der dated 30.08.2018 could not b e sustained. Consequently, Offic e Order dated 22.06.2020 was issued withdrawing the earlier order an d restoring the position that existe d prior to the Review DPC order d a ted 30.08.2018.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
14 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
6.7 Learned cou n sel denied any allegation of m a la fides or deliberate harassme n t and submitted that the responde n ts had acted bona fide and strictl y in accordance with the successive clarifications issued by the CAG. S ince the CAG had subsequently cla r ified that the Review DPC was n ot in order, the respondents wer e justified in withdrawing the co n sequential benefits flowing from th e order dated 30.08.2018 and rest o ring the applicant's earlier position.
6.8 With regard t o the applicant's claim for arrears of pay from 01.04.2016, learned c ounsel submitted that the CAG's cl a rification did not grant the appli c ant promotion as Accountant wit h effect from 01.04.2016 and, th e refore, there was no question of payment of arrears. It was furth e r submitted that, pursuant to the Tri b unal's order dated 15.07.2020 in O A No. 2087/2020, the applicant's r e presentation was duly consider e d and a reasoned and speaking order dated 11.08.2020 was pass e d within the stipulated time.
6.9 Lastly, learne d counsel submitted that the applica n t's claim for stepping up of pa y at par with his erstwhile junior s was rightly rejected, since the o r der dated 30.08.2018 granting him deemed-date promotion had its e lf been withdrawn vide Office O rder dated 22.06.2020. The rej e ction of the claim was accordingly c o mmunicated to the applicant vid e letter dated 31.07.2020. It was al s o submitted that the respondent s had promptly complied with the Tri b unal's order
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
15 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
dated 15.07.2020 b y issuing the speaking and reasone d order dated 11.08.2020.
7.1 Learned cou n sel further submitted that the r esult of the Departmental Exam i nation was declared on 12.05.2015, wherein the applicant was decla r ed successful, and by that date he had already completed the requi s ite three years of continuous servic e in the MTS cadre. Thus, accordi n g to the applicant, he had fulfilled t he eligibility
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
16 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
conditions prescrib e d under the applicable Recruitme n t Rules for promotion to the p ost of Accountant. The responden t s, therefore, could not defeat his accrued eligibility merely on the gr o und that he had subsequently be e n promoted as Clerk.
7.2 It was furt h er contended that, even after p r omoting the applicant as Clerk, the respondents ought to have c o nsidered his candidature for pr o motion to the post of Accountant , particularly when he was senior to the employees who were subsequently promoted from the M TS cadre under the Departmental Examination quota. Learned cou n sel submitted that the applicant h a d completed more than three y e ars of regular service in the MTS cadre as on 01.04.2016 and that his juniors could not have been promoted to the post of Accountant by completely ignoring his claim. Such action, according to learn e d counsel, was arbitrary and co n trary to the applicable Recruitment Rules as well as Articles 14 a n d 16 of the Constitution.
7.3 Learned co u nsel also placed reliance upon the C&AG's clarificatory order dated 11.07.2016 and submitt e d that the respondents themse l ves had sought guidance from the C&AG after receiving the applic a nt's representation dated 07.04.201 6 . The C&AG had thereafter dire c ted that the applicant could be c o nsidered for promotion to the po s t of Accountant after reversion to th e MTS cadre.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
17 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
Despite receipt of t h e said clarification from the highes t authority in the Department, the respondent authority took more tha n two years to implement the same and ultimately issued the promotio n order dated 30.08.2018 granti n g the applicant deemed-date p r omotion as Accountant with ef fe ct from 01.04.2016, i.e. the date o n which his juniors had been promoted.
7.4 It was furthe r submitted that, after implementing the aforesaid clarification and iss u ing the promotion order dated 30.08.2018, the respondents could n o t subsequently reopen the issue and w ithdraw the promotion to the detriment of the applicant. Lea r ned counsel contended that the C&AG's clarification dated 11.07.2016 had not imposed any condit i on denying monetary benefits fro m 01.04.2016, and therefore the r e spondent authority could not hav e unilaterally imposed such a con d ition while implementing the said clarification.
7.5 As regards t he subsequent clarification dated 13.09.2018, learned counsel sub m itted that the respondent No.1 h a d admittedly received the said cl a rification but failed to take the nec e ssary action thereon. According to the applicant, the clarification required the authority to ascertai n whether the applicant desired to c o ntinue in the Clerk cadre or opt f o r consideration for promotion to th e Accountant cadre. Had the resp o ndent authority acted upon the sai d clarification and sought the appl i cant's option at the relevant time, the subsequent
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
18 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
controversy could have been avoided. The applicant therefore contended that the r e spondents could not take advantag e of their own failure to act upon t h e clarification.
7.6 Learned co u nsel further assailed the subse q uent C&AG clarification dated 2 1 .05.2020, submitting that the resp o ndents, after having already impl e mented the earlier clarification an d granted the applicant deemed- d ate promotion with effect from 01.04.2016, reopened the settled issue after a considerable lapse of ti m e. According to learned counsel, t h e said clarification resulted in with d rawal of the promotion already g ranted to the applicant and resto r ation of his earlier position wit h effect from 02.04.2018, thereby ca u sing serious prejudice to him. It w as contended that such retrospecti v e withdrawal of the benefit alread y granted was contrary to the princip l es of natural justice, service ju r isprudence and Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
7.7 Learned co u nsel also contended that the p lea of the respondents that t h e Review DPC was not permissib l e under the DoP&T OM dated 13.04.1998 could not justify withd r awal of the applicant's promoti o n without considering the fact tha t the Review DPC had itself been convened by the respondents and t he applicant had thereafter bee n granted promotion with a dee m ed date of 01.04.2016. The ap p licant cannot, according to learne d counsel, be
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
19 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
made to suffer on a c count of an administrative decision taken by the respondents themse l ves, particularly when the applican t had neither played any role in convening the Review DPC nor co m mitted any wrongdoing.
7.8 With regard t o the respondents' contention that r e version from the post of Clerk to MTS ought to have been on the ap p licant's own volition, learned co u nsel submitted that the applicant h a d never been called upon to exe r cise any such option. The respondents, despite having received the C&AG's clarification dated 13.09.2 0 18, failed to seek the applicant's consent or option and thereafter s o ught to rely upon the applicant's alleged failure to seek reversion as a ground for withdrawing his promotion. Such a course, accordin g to learned counsel, was wholly unjustified, particularly when the o mission was attributable to the re s pondents themselves.
7.9 Lastly, learn e d counsel submitted that the rej e ction of the applicant's claim for stepping up of pay was consequentia l to the illegal withdrawal of his p r omotion with effect from 01.04.20 1 6. Since the applicant was entitl e d to be placed at par with his jun i ors who had been promoted from that date, his claim for pay fixation and consequential mone t ary benefits could not have been re j ected merely by relying upon the subsequent withdrawal order. Lea r ned counsel, therefore, urged t h at the impugned order dated 22.06.2020
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
20 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
withdrawing the ap p licant's deemed-date promotion, a s well as the consequential order s , be quashed and set aside and the applicant be granted all conseq u ential benefits, including promot i on and pay fixation with effect f r om 01.04.2016.
8.1 Learned cou n sel submitted that the applicant was appointed as Multi-Tasking Staff ( MTS) on 04.11.2011 and was prom o ted as Clerk under the seniority quota with effect from 01.04.2015. A lthough the applicant had appeared in the Departmental Exa m ination for Accountants held i n February 2015, the result thereof w as declared only on 13.05.2015. O n the crucial date, i.e. 01.04.2015, for the panel year 2015-16, the a p plicant was eligible for promotion t o the post of Clerk and was acco r dingly promoted against the avail a ble vacancy, which constituted h is first promotional opportunity fr o m the MTS cadre.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
21 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
8.2 It was furthe r submitted that, upon his promotion as Clerk with effect from 01.04.2 0 15, the applicant ceased to belong to the MTS cadre. Under the ap p licable Recruitment Rules, an offici a l in the Clerk cadre was required to have three years of regular service in that cadre for consideration fo r promotion to the post of Account a nt. Since the applicant had rende r ed only one year of regular service in the Clerk cadre as on 01.04. 2 016, he did not satisfy the requi s ite eligibility condition for promo t ion as Accountant from the Clerk ca d re.
8.3 Learned cou n sel submitted that the applicant w a s, therefore, not eligible for cons i deration for promotion to the post o f Accountant against the Graduat e (Group ‘D’)/MTS quota for the panel year 201617, since on the cruc i al date, i.e. 01.04.2016, he was no lo n ger working in the MTS cadre. T h e fact that certain officials junior to t he applicant, who continued to r emain in the MTS cadre, were p romoted as Accountants under t h e examination quota with effect fro m 01.04.2016 would not confer an y right upon the applicant, as the pro m otions were required to be mad e with reference to the eligibility of t h e concerned officials on the cruc i al date and against the vacancies av a ilable in the respective panel yea r .
8.4 Learned cou n sel further submitted that the cont e ntion of the applicant that he ha d never sought promotion to the post of Clerk is of no consequence. T h e applicant was promoted as Cle r k under the
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
22 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
seniority quota in accordance with the applicable rules and, having accepted such pro m otion, he could not claim, as a m a tter of right, simultaneous consideration against a promotional avenu e available to officials continuing i n the MTS cadre.
8.5 With regar d to the applicant's representa t ion seeking promotion as Accou n tant with effect from 01.04.2016, le a rned counsel submitted that the matter was referred by Respon d ent No.1 to Respondent No.2 f o r appropriate guidance, as the issue involved interpretation and a p plication of the relevant Recruitment Rules and other service rules. Respondent No.2 initially furnishe d clarification vide communication dated 11.07.2016. However, as cert a in aspects of the clarification req u ired further elucidation, Responde n t No.1 again referred the matter t o Respondent No.2 vide letter date d 01.08.2016. Thus, the delay in t a king a final decision cannot be attr i buted to any mala fide intention on the part of the respondents.
8.6 Learned cou n sel submitted that, in the meanti m e, a Review Departmental Prom o tion Committee was convened and, on the basis of its recommendati o ns, the applicant was reverted to t h e MTS cadre for the period fro m 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2016 and w a s granted a deemed-date promo t ion to the post of Accountant wit h effect from 01.04.2016, i.e. fro m the date on which his juniors in t h e MTS cadre had been promote d under the examination quota. H is inter se
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
23 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
seniority in the Ac c ountant cadre was also restored. H owever, the benefit of such dee m ed-date promotion was granted o n ly notionally and without arrears o f pay and allowances.
8.7 Learned cou n sel further submitted that, subs e quently, the applicant raised the issue of recovery of the pay drawn b y him during the period in which h e had actually worked as Clerk and also claimed actual monetary be n efits on the basis of the deemed-da t e promotion. Consequently, the m atter was again referred to Respon d ent No.2 for clarification. Respon d ent No.2, vide communication date d 21.05.2020, clarified that the R e view DPC had not been convened i n accordance with the conditions s tipulated in DoP&T OM dated 13.0 4 .1998. It was specifically clarified that reversion from the Clerk cadr e to the MTS cadre, for the purp o se of consideration for promotion t o the post of Accountant, was req u ired to be on the official's own voliti o n.
8.8 It was further submitted that Respondent No.2 clarified that even if the applicant were to be reverted to the MTS cad r e on his own volition, in terms of F R 15-A, he would have to be placed a s the juniormost official in the M TS cadre and could thereafter be c o nsidered for promotion to the po s t of Accountant only prospectively, s ubject to the availability of vaca n cy and fulfillment of the prescri b ed eligibility conditions. Respondent No.2 also clarified that the pay d rawn by the applicant while act u ally discharging duties as Clerk n eed not be
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
24 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
recovered, as he had admittedly performed duties in that c apacity.
8.9 Learned cou n sel submitted that, in view of t he aforesaid clarification dated 2 1.05.2020, the earlier order date d 30.08.2018 granting the appli c ant deemed-date promotion to the post of Accountant with e f fect from 01.04.2016 could not b e sustained. Accordingly, the sai d order was withdrawn vide impugne d order dated 22.06.2020 and the position obtaining prior to issuanc e of the order dated 30.08.2018 w as restored, along with consequent i al effects. It was submitted that the respondents had merely corrected an earlier administrative actio n in accordance with the subsequen t clarification issued by the com p etent authority and, therefore, no illegality or arbitrariness could b e attributed to such action.
8.10 With regard t o the applicant's contention that h e was eligible for promotion as Ac c ountant on 01.04.2016, learned cou n sel reiterated that the applicant w a s neither an MTS on the relevant cr u cial date nor had he completed t h e requisite three years of regular s ervice in the Clerk cadre. Thus, h e did not fulfill the eligibility criter i a prescribed under the Recruitm e nt Rules for promotion to the post o f Accountant through either of the two relevant channels.
8.11 Learned cou n sel further submitted that the r esult of the Departmental Exam i nation for Accountant was declared o n 13.05.2015 and promotions b a sed upon the said examination were made
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
25 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
prospectively with r e ference to the vacancies and eligibil i ty conditions applicable to the res p ective panel years. Merely because t he applicant had appeared in the examination prior to his promo t ion as Clerk would not, by itsel f , confer upon him an indefeasibl e right to be promoted as Accou n tant from a date on which he did n ot fulfill the prescribed eligibility conditions.
8.12 As regards the clarification dated 13.09.201 8 issued by Respondent No.2, le a rned counsel submitted that by the time the said clarification was re c eived, the applicant had already b e en regularly promoted to the post of Accountant. Therefore, no furth e r action was taken by Responden t No.1 at that stage. Subsequently, w h en the issue concerning the valid i ty of the Review DPC and the applic a nt's deemeddate promotion was again examined, Respondent No.2 f urnished the clarification dated 2 1.05.2020, which specifically poi n ted out the defect in the earlier R eview DPC proceedings.
8.13 Learned cou n sel submitted that the responden t s had acted bona fide and thr o ughout sought guidance from th e competent authority whenever any doubt arose regarding the inte r pretation or implementation of t he applicable rules. The impugned order dated 22.06.2020 was co n sequently passed pursuant to the clarification dated 21.05.2020 an d cannot be characterized as an act o f harassment, victimization or mal a fide exercise of power.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
26 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
8.14 With regard t o the applicant's claim for stepping up of pay at par with his erstwhi l e junior, learned counsel submitted that the said claim was wholly c o nsequential upon the order dated 30.08.2018. Once the Review DP C proceedings and the consequential deemed-date promotion granted t hereunder were withdrawn and r e ndered nonexistent, there rem a ined no legal basis for extending t h e benefit of stepping up of pay t o the applicant. The rejection of the s a id claim was, therefore, in confor m ity with the impugned order dated 22.06.2020. Learned counsel fur t her submitted that the respondents h ad also acted in accordance with t h e clarification issued by Respondent No.2 and the applicable Recruit m ent Rules and service regulations. There was neither any bias n o r any mala fide intention on the part of the respondents in taki n g the impugned action. The appl i cant, having failed to establish a n y enforceable right to retrospective p romotion as Accountant with effe c t from 01.04.2016, could not seek c o ntinuation of the benefit flowing f r om an order which had subsequentl y been found to have been issued c ontrary to the applicable procedure. 8.15 It was, theref o re, contended that the allegations a n d objections raised by the applic a nt in his rejoinder are devoid of me r it and do not dislodge the stand taken by the respondents in their origi n al reply. The respondents accord i ngly prayed that the rejoinder f iled by the applicant be rejecte d and the Original Application, bei n g devoid of merit, be dismissed.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
27 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
Digitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
RAVI KANOJIA
OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
28
10.1 It is also not i n dispute that the applicant's represe n tation led to a reference by Res p ondent No.1 to the office of the C &AG and a clarification dated 11.07.2016 was issued. Thereafter, the matter continued to be exa m ined and ultimately a Review DPC w as convened in 2018. On the basi s of the recommendations of the Re v iew DPC, the applicant was rever t ed to the MTS cadre notionally for the relevant period and was g r anted deemed-date promotion to the post of Accountant with eff e ct from 01.04.2016 vide order date d 30.08.2018. The said benefit was granted notionally and without arre a rs of pay and allowances.
10.2 Subsequently , on further examination of the matt e r, the C&AG vide clarification da t ed 13.09.2018 stated, inter alia , t h at under the applicable Recruitment Rules, a Graduate MTS having three years' continuous service in the grade on passing the D epartmental Examination or a C l erk having three years' continuous s ervice in the grade on passing th e Departmental Examination could b e considered for promotion as Ac c ountant. The clarification further i n dicated that, in the case of the ap p licant, consideration from the MTS s tream would require reversion f r om the Clerk cadre and that t h e individual concerned had to ta k e a call whether to accept promotio n to the Clerk cadre or wait for a v acancy in the Accountant cadre. T h e applicant, however, had by the n already been regularly promoted as Accountant
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
29
with effect from 02. 0 4.2018. Thereafter, on a further re f erence made by Respondent No.1, the C&AG vide communication date d 21.05.2020 clarified that the R e view DPC convened in the matte r was not in accordance with th e conditions stipulated in DoP&T’s OM dated 13.04.1998. It was f u rther clarified that reversion from C lerk to MTS for the purpose of consideration for promotion as Ac c ountant was required to be on t he official's own volition and tha t , upon such reversion, the offici a l would be placed as the junior-mo s t in the MTS cadre and could the r eafter be considered for promotion p rospectively, subject to availabilit y of vacancy and recommendation of the DPC. It was in consequence o f this clarification that the respondents withdrew the order dated 30.0 8 .2018.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
30 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
Further, admittedly, he had completed only one year of r e gular service in the Clerk cadr e as on 01.04.2016, whereas the applicable Recruitment Rules r equired three years' regular service in the feeder cadre.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
31 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
rules. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly h eld that an employee has a righ t to be considered for promotion bu t not a vested right to promotion i t self as ruled by the Hon’ble Supre m e Court in a catena of judgments , some of which are S.B. Bhattacharjee v. S.D. Majumdar , repor t ed in (2007) 10 SCC 513 (Para 1 3); Hardev Singh v. Union of India , reported in (2011) 10 SCC 1 21 (Para 17); and High Court of Judicature at Madras v. R. Perachi , reported in (2011) 12 SCC 137 (Paras 32 and 33).
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
32 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
qualifying service and Clerks with the prescribed qualifyi n g service. In the case of the applicant, three years of regular service in the Clerk cadre were complet e d only in 2018, following which he w as regularly promoted as Acco u ntant with effect from 02.04.201 8 . Thus, the applicant ultimately received promotion as Accountant upon fulfilling the eligibility conditi o n applicable to his cadre.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
33 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
upon him an eligibili t y which he did not possess on the re l evant date.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
34
therefore, also with o ut substance. The withdrawal of a n erroneous deemed-date promo t ion, in the circumstances of the present case, was not founded on misc o nduct, inefficiency or any stigma at t aching to the applicant. It was a n administrative correction of an o rder which, according to the co m petent authority's subsequent clar i fication, had been issued contra r y to the prescribed procedure a n d eligibility conditions. Article 3 11(2) of the Constitution is cons e quently not attracted merely bec a use the correction has an adverse e ff ect upon the applicant's seniority o r monetary prospects.
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
35 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
36 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
the basis of that ver y deemed-date promotion. The resp o ndents were, therefore, justified i n declining the applicant's claim fo r stepping up consequential upon t he withdrawal of the order dated 30. 0 8.2018.
Digitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
RAVI KANOJIA
37 OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
RAVI KANOJIADigitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
OA Nos.2100, 210 1 & 2102 of 2020
38
(Braj Mohan Agrawal) ( R.N. Singh) Member (A) Member (J)
/ravi/
Digitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 13:22:47+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0
RAVI KANOJIA
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a promoted employee retains the right to claim retrospective promotion as Accountant with effect from 01.04.2016 when the Recruitment Rules require three years of service in the specific cadre
Whether the convening of a Review Departmental Promotion Committee to grant promotion based on a hypothetical reversion to a lower cadre was contrary to the Departmental Promotion and Training (Recrui
Whether the withdrawal of a deemed-date promotion order found to be procedurally illegal constitutes a violation of Article 311(2) or the principles of natural justice.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
High Court of Punjab and Haryana v. Bahadur Singh BattaReferred¶77
High Court of Punjab and Haryana v. Bahadur Singh Batta, Civil Appeal No. 9943 of 1995, April 25, 2001
S.B. Bhattacharjee v. S.D. MajumdarFollowed¶180
S.B. Bhattacharjee v. S.D. Majumdar, (2007) 10 SCC 513 · Who else cites this
Hardev Singh v. Union of IndiaFollowed¶180
Hardev Singh v. Union of India, (2011) 10 SCC 121 · Who else cites this
High Court of Judicature at Madras v. R. PerachiFollowed¶180
High Court of Judicature at Madras v. R. Perachi, (2011) 12 SCC 137 · Who else cites this
Indian Council of Agricultural Research & Anr. v. T.K. Suryanarayan & Ors.Explained¶200
Indian Council of Agricultural Research & Anr. v. T.K. Suryanarayan & Ors., (1997) 6 SCC 766 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Gopal Khanal Chhetri
Accountant General (Accounts & Entitlements)-II, Maharashtra
Deputy Comptroller & Auditor General (HR)
Mahesh Subhash Ishi
Rajkumar Mahashingh Yadav
R.N. Singh
Braj Mohan Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
An original application before a tribunal, most commonly a service dispute before the Central or a State Administrative Tribunal.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
