HC says HoD’s post not a promotion post

Post Visitors : 735

June 13, 2012 | LEGAL DIARY, NEWS | Post by: admin

Chandigarh, June 12
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that the Head of the Department’s post is not a promotion post. Justice K. Kannan has ruled the post is just for administrative purposes. The ruling came on a petition filed by Dr Ashok Kumar Yadav, working as a senior scientist with Haryana Agriculture University (HAU) at Hisar.

In his petition against the HAU Vice-Chancellor, Dr Yadav of the Agronomy Department had challenged an order issued on December 5, 2011, transferring him to Uchani in Karnal.

He had argued that the transfer order was not on grounds of administrative exigency, but due to bias against him and to accommodate R.K. Pannu. The petitioner had claimed that Pannu was a close relative of the Vice-Chancellor.

The petitioner had claimed that he was promoted as Class I officer in the Department of Agronomy in February 1995 and further promoted as a professor in February 2003.

Pannu, on the other hand, joined the Department of Agronomy as a junior scientist in July 1983 and was promoted as professor in the department in July 2004.

He had elaborated that Pannu, though junior to him, was posted as the head of the department. After hearing the rival contentions, Justice Kannan asserted the transfer could be challenged only if the rules did not permit the same, or the transfer itself was a punishment.

A transfer involves uprooting a person from a place and it may not be comfortable in all situations. But, transfer was a necessary incident of service and the petitioner could not challenge the same unless, he had right to a particular post, which was denied. Or else, it was ordered due to mala fide reasons.

“The post of head of the department itself is not a promotion post. It is only a manner of officiating for administrative purposes…. The petitioner cannot, therefore, complain that any of his legal rights is infringed. The challenge to the impugned order cannot, therefore, be sustained,” Justice Kannan ruled while dismissing the writ petition.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedinmailby feather



Leave a Reply