This appeal addresses whether an employee who obtained educational qualifications via open university foundation courses prior to subsequent policy revisions can be disqualified from promotion. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Madras High Court’s division and review bench orders, and restored the single judge’s directive to consider the appellant for promotion. The Court held that the subsequent invalidation of open university foundation courses via executive orders cannot be applied retrospectively to penalize employees or invalidate longstanding service eligibility governed by prevailing norms.
- Prospective Nature of Invalidation: The cutoff date for the prospective invalidation of pre-foundation and foundation courses offered by open universities is the date of issuance of G.O. Ms. No. 144 (November 20, 2017), protecting qualifications acquired under earlier valid regimes.
- Improper Focus on Feeder Cadre: The High Court erred by shifting its focus to question the appellant’s initial eligibility to hold the feeder post of Tourist Officer after 15 years of unblemished service, rather than restricting its review to promotion criteria.
- Binding Precedent Ignored: Both the Division Bench and Review Bench failed to follow the sound reasoning established by a coordinate bench in Thavam, which held that employees affected by shifts in qualification policies must be protected.
- Fulfillment of Promotion Criteria: The appellant satisfied all statutory prerequisites for promotion to Assistant Director of Tourism, including holding a recognized degree, passing the accounts test, and completing the requisite out-of-state service.
- Restoration of Relief: The Supreme Court restored the judgment of the learned Single Judge, directing the respondents to consider the appellant’s case for promotion in accordance with the law.
