SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
O. CHINNAPPA REDDY AND E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ.
Narender Chadha and others, Petitioners
Versus
Union of India and others, Respondents.
Civil Misc. Petn. No. 2604 of 1985 in Writ Petn. No. 1595 of 1979
Decided on 11-2-1986.
Advocates appeared
Petitioner No.1 in person, Mr. P. P. Rao, 639 Sr. Advocate; Mr. Uma Dutta, Miss C. K. Suchitra, Advocates with him for Petitioners Nos. 2 to 25, Mr. Govinda Mukhoty, Sr. Advocate; Mr. P. K. Gupta, Advocate with him for the Intervenor, Mr. R. K.Garg, Sr.Advocate; Mr. R. K. Jain and Mr.Gaurav Jain, Advocates with him for Respondents. Mr. F. S. Nariman, Sr. Advocate; Mr. A. K. Ganguli, Mr. R. D. Agarwala, Mr. C. V. Subba Rao, Advocates with him for Respondents (Union of India).
Constitution of India Article 32 – Indian Statistical Service Rules, 1961 – Indian Economic Service Rules, 1961 – Praying for a writ – Perennial dispute regarding seniority between direct recruits and promotees which exists in almost all the departments of Government has not spared the Indian Economic Service and the Indian Statistical Service with which we are concerned in this case – This is the second phase of the battle which is being waged in this Court – Earlier certain persons who had been holding posts in Grade IV of these two Services had filed Writ Petition praying for a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus directing the Union of India to confirm/regularise the petitioners in the posts held by them as and from the dates when they became due for confirmation or regularisation in accordance with the Indian Economic Service Rules, 1961 or the Indian Statistical Service Rules, 1961 and to consider them for all future promotions when due on the basis of such seniority –Held, Court are informed that some of the promotees and direct recruits who are governed by this decision have been promoted to higher grades – If as a result of the preparation of the seniority list in accordance with the decision and the review of the promotions made to higher grades any of them is likely to be reverted such officer shall not be reverted – He shall be continued in the higher post which he is now holding by creating a supernumerary post, if necessary to accommodate him – His further promotion shall however be given to him when it becomes due as per the new seniority list to be prepared pursuant to this decision – There shall, however, be a review of all promotions made so far from Grade IV to higher posts in the fight of the new seniority list – If any officer is found entitled to be so promoted to a higher grade he shall be given such promotion when he would have been promoted in accordance with the new seniority list and he shall be given all consequential financial benefits flowing therefrom. Such review of promotions shall be completed within three months and the consequential financial benefits shall be paid within three months thereafter – Petition is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGMENT
VENKATARAMIAH, J. :— The perennial dispute regarding seniority between direct recruits and promotees which exists in almost all the departments of Government has not spared the Indian Economic Service and the Indian Statistical Service with which we are concerned in this case. This is the second phase of the battle which is being waged in this Court. Earlier certain persons who had been holding posts in Grade IV of these two Services had filed Writ Petition No. 1595 of 1979 under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus directing the Union of India to confirm/regularise the petitioners in the posts held by them as and from the dates when they became due for confirmation or regularisation in accordance with the Indian Economic Service Rules, 1961 or the Indian Statistical Service Rules, 1961 and to consider them for all future promotions when due on the basis of such seniority. The said petition was filed in a representative capacity with the leave of the Court under O. I, R. 8 C.P.C. A few officers who had been recruited as direct recruits to the posts in Grade IV in the said departments were impleaded as respondents and they were sued in a representative capacity as representing all other direct recruits who were likely to be affected by the decision. After the above case was heard, the Court passed a short order on Feb. 1, 1984 which reads thus:
"We are not able to understand why the vacancies available to the departmental candidates under R. 8(ii) of the Indian Economic and Indian Statistical Services Rules, 1961, have not been filled up on regular basis. We find that some of the departmental candidates (petitioners) have been holding the promotional posts on ad hoc basis for several years. There appears to be no justification for keeping the ad hoc so long. We, therefore, issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Union of India to fill up, within four weeks from today, the vacancies available to the departmental candidates under R. 8(ii) with effect from the date from which the petitioners became entitled to be promoted on regular basis. Their seniority will be determined according to Rules. We wish to make it clear that there is no question of any rotation system being applied under the Rules, as they exist now. The writ petition is disposed of in these terms. There will be no order as to costs."(Rule 8(ii) has to be read as R. 8(1)(a)(ii))
2. The Union of India, as can be seen from the order set out above, was directed to comply with the directions contained therein within four weeks from the date of the order. On the expiry of four weeks, stipulated by this Court, the Union of India filed an application for extension of time to comply with the directions contained therein fully. Time was extended by the Court till April 30, 1984. On May 1, 1984 the Union of India filed before the Court two sets of seniority lists in respect of the above two Services, namely, lists based on the principle of rotation and lists based on Rule 9-C of the Indian Economic Service / Indian Statistical Service Rules. Since on a perusal of the said lists it was found that the position of some of the departmental promotees who had already put in nearly 15 years of service in Grade IV was worse than the position in which they were before the writ petition was filed and were facing imminent threat of reversion to the feeder posts from which they had been promoted several years ago, the Court directed the petition to come up for hearing before the Court on its re-opening after summer vacation and directed that status quo should be maintained in the meanwhile. Then on July 24, 1984 the Court while declining to endorse either of the two seniority lists directed the Union of India to implement the order dated February 1, 1984 on or before 30th November, 1984. In the meanwhile the petitioners filed Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 2604 of 1985 complaining that the Union of India had failed
applied : G. S. Lamba v. Union of India
relied on : A.Janardhana v. Union of India
distinguished : Karam Pal v. Union of India
referred to : S B Patwardhan v. State of Maharashtra
Rajendra Narain Singh v. Stale of Bihar
Baleshwar Dass v. State of U.P
Pran Krishna Goswami v. State of W.B.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.