Summary
The Supreme Court restored the Single Judge’s judgment invalidating the impugned promotion and encadrement. The record established manipulation of vacancies and promotion before completion of the required service, rather than a bona fide administrative error. Delay and laches could not protect the resulting favouritism and fraud, particularly where the representation and ensuing inquiry reasonably explained the delay. The Division Bench’s contrary judgment was set aside and all appeals allowed without costs.
Issues
- Whether the impugned promotion and encadrement complied with eligibility and vacancy requirements.
- Whether delay and laches justified preserving promotions obtained through the established manipulation.
Held
- Creation of a personal ex-cadre post, encadrement through an inflated vacancy figure and promotion despite only three years’ service against a five-year requirement demonstrated undue favour and illegality. The Court agreed with the Single Judge’s findings. (¶¶ 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 28)
- The Division Bench had accepted the foundational defects but erred in treating the exercise as a bona fide mistake and preserving it because of delay and subsequent promotion. The record showed deliberate manipulation of the system. (¶¶ 23, 24, 26)
- The Association’s representation and the inquiry ordered upon it provided a reasonable explanation for delay. Fraud vitiates action and could not be protected by invoking laches in these circumstances. (¶¶ 27, 28)
- All appeals were allowed, the Division Bench judgment set aside and the Single Judge’s judgment restored, without costs. (¶ 29)
Result
Appeals allowed; Division Bench judgment dated 7 August 2015 set aside and Single Judge’s judgment restored. No order as to costs.