The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that the qualification is a valid reason for the classification between people of the same class in matters of promotion. In the judgment given in Chandan Banerjee & Ors v. Krishna Prosad Ghosh & Ors, a board composed of judges DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli found that this classification on the basis of qualification does not violate articles 14 and 16 of the constitution.
Judge Chandrachud's ruling noted that the legislator or delegate in matters of public order and public employment must have sufficient space to decide the quality of the people he intends to employ with respect to different positions.
The bench while upholding the High Court's view further observed that,
"The impugned circular indicates that these supernumerary posts were created for removal of stagnation amongst SAEs. Although that may be the stated goal of the impugned circular, KMC has urged before this Court that the distinction in education qualification for promotion has been made for the purpose of enhancing administrative efficiency. It cannot be denied that SAEs once promoted to the post of an AE in these supernumerary posts would be performing the task and functions of an AE. Thus, it is not merely a change in the designation of an SAE to an AE, but involves an increase in workload, supervisory functions, and performance of the regular functions of an AE. Since that is the case, we do not find any reason why the rationale underlying the need for higher degree-holders in the AE cadre through regular promotion would not be applicable in the case of supernumerary posts."
"While creating supernumerary posts, KMC has not completely restricted the promotional avenues of diploma-holder SAEs who have stagnated in their service. It has provided adequate opportunity to them to advance in their career, although on different terms and conditions. Thus, the promotional policy of KMC for supernumerary posts is not irrational or arbitrary or to the detriment of diploma holder SAEs. In matters of public policy and public employment, the legislature or its delegate must be given sufficient room to decide the quality of individuals it seeks to employ as against different positions. As long as these decisions are not arbitrary, this Court must refrain from interfering in the policy domain," the bench observed.
Case Title: Chandan Banerjee & Ors v. Krishna Prosad Ghosh & Ors.
Coram: Justices DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli
Citation: LL 2021 SC 487