20 years and waiting: A decade on, SC to hear athlete’s promotion plea junked by HC in 2016
NEW DELHI: A national-level sportswoman, employed as a safaiwala (group D employee) in railways since 2003, has been awaiting promotion to group C level for last two decades despite the railway ministry’s policy to grant out-of-turn first promotion to medal-winning employees, a criterion she had fulfilled by winning two medals in national events.A decade after winning medals but not getting promotion as per the policy, Rajni Rani moved Punjab and Haryana HC in 2016 with a writ petition, which got dismissed on technical grounds. Her appeal against the HC order has been pending in SC since Nov 2016.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
It was last heard on Jan 9, 2017, when a bench of Justices J Chelameswar and A M Sapre admitted her petition and asked the Union govt to file a response in eight weeks. On May 15, 2018, registrar Kapil Mehta had recorded that statement of case had not been filed by any of the parties despite expiry of the time granted. He had asked for the case to be listed before the court as per rules. However, her petition continued to gather dust till her counsel Wednesday requested a bench headed by CJI Surya Kant for an early hearing. A visibly unhappy CJI directed the registry to list the petition for hearing on Aug 21.Rajni said she was due for promotion in 2005 after winning medals but was denied the benefit of first promotion on the ground that one of the four events she had participated in did not qualify as a national event. She said the rules prescribed participation in only two events. Rajni said she had won a bronze medal at 52nd Northern Railway Athletic Meet in Feb 2005, gold medal at 44th Senior National Inter-State competition in July 2004 and represented railways in open National in Mumbai in Sept 2004, securing fourth position.Rajni was denied a promotion in 2013 despite a directive by Central Administrative Tribunal to railways in Sept 2012 to consider her case. When she challenged the decision, both CAT and HC dismissed her petitions.
