Rajasthan High Court Orders Review of Promotion Denial for Lecturer

Court rules censure penalty insufficient for denying promotional consideration; mandates review DPC for fair assessment.

In a significant judgment passed by the Rajasthan High Court on November 6, 2025, Justice Farjand Ali addressed the contentious issue of promotion denial based on a penalty of censure. The case, filed by petitioner Manish Bhargava against the State of Rajasthan, challenged the decision of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) to deny his promotion to the position of Lecturer (School Education) due to a censure penalty.

The petitioner, represented by Mr. Yashpal Khilery, argued that his candidacy was unjustly dismissed solely because of a penalty of censure, despite meeting the seniority-cum-merit criteria necessary for promotion. The DPC had deemed Bhargava ineligible for promotion for the academic year 2022-23, citing a censure penalty imposed in December 2019.

In its defense, the State, represented by Deputy Government Advocate Mr. NK Mehta and Mr. Bhupesh Charan, maintained that the censure penalty naturally disqualified Bhargava from promotion. However, the court found this reasoning insufficient, referencing the precedent set in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Ashok Singhvi.

Justice Ali opined that denying promotional consideration solely due to a censure penalty was not justified. He emphasized that the DPC must assess an employee’s suitability for promotion based on seniority-cum-merit, irrespective of any penalties imposed. Furthermore, the court highlighted the necessity for the DPC to evaluate the minimum merit required for administrative efficiency, rather than outright rejecting an application based on past penalties.

The court ordered that Bhargava's case for promotion be reconsidered. If promotions had already been granted, a review DPC must be conducted to assess Bhargava’s eligibility in light of the principles established in Ashok Singhvi’s case. The court directed the respondents to complete the necessary actions within six weeks.

This ruling underscores the importance of fair and comprehensive evaluation processes in promotion considerations, ensuring that penalties such as censure do not automatically preclude employees from career advancement opportunities.

Bottom Line:

Denial of promotion based on penalty of censure is not justified; DPC must adjudge suitability for promotion irrespective of penalty imposed.

Statutory provision(s): Seniority-cum-merit criteria, Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) procedures, Penalty of censure regulations.

Manish Bhargava v. State of Rajasthan, (Rajasthan) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2809496