‘Amend rules for promotions periodically’

Justice SM Subramaniam held that improvements in service conditions were required not only for the development of the organisation, but also to provide effective public administration by the State and central governments. Employees cannot challenge an amendment on educational qualification and claim promotion or appoint based on old qualifications, the court said.

“If such an argument is accepted, then the same will have disastrous consequences of proceeding backward in respect of the development of the State or State-owned organisations,” the judge said. The petitioner, S Meenakshi, was appointed as Helper (Training) in TNEB on June 4, 2010. But by virtue of the impugned amendment dated May 24, 2014, her prospects for further promotion to junior assistant post was barred owing to the transition of higher qualification for appointment to that post.

Pointing out that promotion or appointment could never be claimed as a matter of right, Justice Subramaniam said: “Whenever the process of preparation of a panel or a provisional list is sought to be prepared, then only the right of the qualified employees will accrue.

“Constant review of all these factors are certainly required and a periodical review will be of more effect. It is desirable that an expert committee in this regard, by the State or State-owned organisations, is to be constituted for the purpose of developing and improving not only the service conditions, but also the other rules in this regard,” he added.