Abandoned promotion claim under Article 32 could not be revived after earlier waiver before the High Court.

A petitioner who had earlier sought retrospective promotion to the Indian Administrative Service under Article 226, but expressly did not press that relief after accepting the Government's undertaking on a related promotion issue, could not later revive the same abandoned claim in a fresh Article 32 petition. The Court treated the earlier abandonment as decisive and declined to reopen the matter on the facts. It also noted that, after more than two decades, it would not be just to place the clock back and reconsider the claim for retrospective promotion.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled, under Article 32, to be considered retrospectively for promotion to the Indian Administrative Service after having given up the corresponding claim for relief before the High Court.

Analysis: The petitioner had earlier approached the High Court under Article 226 seeking, among other reliefs, promotion to the Indian Administrative Service with retrospective effect. In the High Court, he accepted the Government's undertaking that his suitability for promotion to the Tripura Civil Service selection grade would be considered and expressly did not press the petition. On the facts, the Court held that the petitioner could not, in a later petition under Article 32, revive and press the same relief which he had himself abandoned. The Court also observed that, given the long passage of time, it would not be just to reopen the matter and place the clock back by more than two decades.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to the claimed retrospective consideration for promotion to the Indian Administrative Service.

---