Chhattisgarh High Court: Seniority is Only a Tiebreaker in ‘Merit-Cum-Seniority’ Promotions

News Citation : 2026 LN (HC) 242 | 2026:CGHC:15280-DB

April 2, 2026 : The High Court of Chhattisgarh has reaffirmed that under the principle of merit-cum-seniority, a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) must conduct a meaningful comparative assessment of merit before falling back on seniority as a tiebreaker. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal dismissed a writ appeal filed by a Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Jail, upholding a Single Judge’s decision to quash a promotion found to be a mechanical application of seniority in derogation of statutory requirements.

The case originated from a vacancy for the post of Deputy Inspector General (DIG) Jail where the appellant, S.S. Tigga, who was nearly 15 years senior to the respondent, was recommended for promotion by a DPC on February 8, 2023. The respondent, Amit Shandilya, challenged this promotion after obtaining records through the RTI Act which he claimed proved he possessed superior ACR gradings and upgraded entries. While the appellant argued that both candidates met the “Very Good” benchmark and were therefore equal in merit under Rule 7(9) of the Chhattisgarh Public Services (Promotion) Rules, 2003, the Court found that the DPC failed to undertake a comparative evaluation and erroneously treated them as equal solely based on similar gradings.

Citing Supreme Court precedents such as Ajit Singh and Others (II) vs. State of Punjab, the Division Bench held that merit must be the predominant consideration and seniority can only operate as a tiebreaker. Consequently, the Court found the promotion order dated March 9, 2023, to be arbitrary and illegal, leading to the dismissal of the writ appeal and the requirement for fresh consideration by a duly constituted DPC.

Case Reference : WA No. 265 of 2026, S.S. Tigga vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others; Counsels; For Appellant(s): Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Senior Advocate, along with Mr. Ali Afzaal Mirza, Advocate; For Respondent(s): Mr. Praveen Das, Additional Advocate General, Mr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate, and Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Senior Advocate, along with Ms. Sunita Jain, Advocate.