Himachal High Court orders promotion of retired forest officers from 2003; slams state for delaying justice

Shimla (Himachal Pradeh) [India], July 7 (ANI): The Himachal Pradeh High Court ha ordered the tate government to promote two retired Range Foret Officer--Pawan Sharma and Prem Chand, to the pot of Aitant Conervator of Foret (ACF) with retropective effect from 2003, lamming the government for prolonged litigation and arbitrary denial of legitimate ervice benefit.
Jutice Sandeep Sharma, while delivering the judgment in connected petition (CWP No. 6145 and 6140 of 2024), aid the petitioner had fulfilled all eligibility criteria under the Himachal Pradeh Foret Service Recruitment and Promotion Rule, 2002, and were wrongfully denied promotion even though their junior had been elevated to the ame pot.
The petitioner hall be promoted a Aitant Conervator of Foret (HPFS) from the year 2003 and will be entitled to all conequential benefit, including pay fixation, arrear, penion reviion, and other retiral benefit, the High Court ruled in the judgment dated July 7, 2025.
The Court added, Since petitioner are in their eventie, thi Court hope and trut that the needful in term of thi order hall be done expeditiouly, preferably within two month.
Pawan Sharma, who wa appointed a Foret Guard in 1978, and Prem Chand, faced decade-long delay in ervice recognition and promotion. Although Sharma wa eventually appointed a Deputy Ranger with retropective effect from 1979 after multiple legal battle including a cae that reached the Supreme Court he uperannuated in December 2011 without being promoted to the ACF pot.
Depite being promoted to Range Foret Officer (RFO) in 2012 with retropective effect from 1996, both petitioner were denied further promotion on ground that they had not paed the departmental examination or held a graduate degree a per the 2005 amendment.
The Court, however, held that their cae mut be evaluated baed on the 2002 promotion rule, which were in force when they completed even year a RFO in 2003. The Court alo noted that vacancie exited in 2003 and that junior were promoted without fulfilling qualification, uch a a graduate degree or departmental exam.
The bench criticized the tate conduct, oberving that the petitioner had uffered becaue of unwarranted and repeated litigation initiated by the government, including review petition and pecial leave petition (SLP), which delayed the implementation of tribunal order.
Their rightful claim cannot be permitted to be defeated on the ground of delay and lache. Delay cannot be ued to perpetuate injutice, the Court oberved, citing Supreme Court precedent in Y.V. Rangaiah v. J. Sreenivaa Rao and B.S. Shehagiri v. State of Karnataka.
The judgment further highlighted that, a per the Departmental Examination Rule of 1997, officer above 55 year were exempted from exam and cited multiple cae where other officer were promoted without paing uch exam.
Both officer had filed repeated repreentation between 2012 and 2022. The Court acknowledged their relentle puruit of jutice and concluded that the petitioner fundamental right had been denied due to arbitrary tate action.
The Court dipoed of the petition with trong word and a clear timeline for implementation: The repondent hall carry out the promotion and releae of benefit within two month.
Thi ruling i likely to have wider implication for imilarly placed officer and could trigger a wave of claim for retropective promotion and ervice benefit in the Himachal Pradeh Foret Department. (ANI)