Employee can't be denied promotion on ground of quarrel with

Image
Press Trust of India Chennai
Last Updated : Dec 26 2014 | 5:20 PM IST
Madras High Court has held that an employee cannot be deprived of promotion on the ground that there is some family quarrel between him and his wife.
Justice D. Hariparanthaman was disposing of a petition filed by one A.Velusamy working as an Assistant Audit officer in the Chief Internal Audit officer, Audit Branch, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation (TANGEDCO), Chennai.
The petitioner had sought a direction to authorities to include his name in the panel for promotion to the post of Internal Audit officer.
In his order, the judge said "If there is only some family dispute between the petitioner and his wife relating to their marriage, the same cannot be put against the petitioner for promotion. Even if a private complaint for bigamy is pending, I am of the view that the same cannot be put against the petitioner."
"It is a different matter if the allegation is made by the wife that the petitioner assaulted her and a criminal case is pending under IPC or a FIR is registered."
A divorce petition is pending in Principal Subordinate Judge's Court, Tiruchirappalli. His wife has also filed for restitution of conjugal rights and it was dismissed on December 23, 2010.
She filed a private complaint before the Jurisdictional Magistrate alleging that Velusamy got married while marriage with her was in subsistence. Based on the complaint his name was not included in the Panel of Assistant Audit Officer for promotion to the post of Internal Audit officer for 2014-15. He was placed under suspension on August 1, 2011 but later it was revoked on January 23, 2012.
But no annual increment was sanctioned to him, the petitioner submitted, adding, representation to authorities did not evoke any response following which he filed the plea.
"Once the petitioner was restored to duty he has to earn the increments automatically. Therefore, there is no reason for the authorities in not granting the annual increments to him. The annual increments could be declined only when there is a punishment that would be operating against him. It is not so.Hence, I am of the view that the authorities shall also sanction the increments to which he is entitled to."
The judge directed the authorities to dispose of his representation of in connection with inclusion of his name in the panel for promotion and also directed the authorities to pay the annual increments within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Dec 26 2014 | 5:20 PM IST

Next Story