Dayashankar Singh Rathore vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 11 January, 2024
"All that happened as a result of making
promotions to the posts of Deputy Collectors
divisionwise and limiting such promotions to 50
per cent of the total number of vacancies in the
posts of Deputy Collector was to reduce the
chances of promotion available to the petitioners.
It is now we ll settled by the decision of this Court
in State of Mysore v. G.B. Purohit 6 that though a
right to be considered for promotion is a condition
of service, mere chances of promotion are not. A
rule which merely affects chances of promotion
cannot be regarded as varying a condition of
service. In Purohit case6 the districtwise seniority
of sanitary inspectors was changed to Statewise
seniority, and as a result of this change the
respondents went down in seniority and became
very junior. This, it was urged, affected their
chances of promotion which were protected under
the proviso to Section 115, sub-section (7). This
contention was negatived and Wanchoo, J., (as
he then was), speaking on behalf of this Court
observed: "It is said on behalf of the respondents
that as their chances of promotion have be en
affected their conditions of service have been
26
changed to their disadvantage. We see no force
in this argument because chances of promotion
are not conditions or service." It is, therefore,
clear that neither the Rules of July '30, 195 9, nor
the procedure for making promotions to the posts
of Deputy Collector divisionwise varies the
conditions of service of the petitioners to their
disadvantage."