Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1995 Supreme(SC) 650

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BEFORE K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.
DILBAG SINGH
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS.
Civil Appeal No. 5704 of 1995 {From the Judgment and Order dated 25-4-1994 of the Allahabad High Court in W.P. No. 2469 of 1989}, decided on May 8, 1995
Advocates appeared:
P.P. Rao, Senior Advocate (Pramod Dayal and Ms K. Choudhary, Advocates, with him) for the Appellant; D.V. Sehgal, Senior Advocate (Nalin Tripathi and R.B. Misra, Advocates, with him) for the Respondents.

Advocates:
D.V.Sehgal, K.Chaudhary, NALIN TRIPATHI, P.P.Rao, PRAMOD DAYAL, R.B.MISHRA

The appellant was entitled to seniority in accordance with the 1980 Rules, which were given retrospective effect, and the right of reservation was maintained during the relevant period.

Headnote:
Seniority - Reservation of Vacancies for Demobilised Officers - The court held that the appellant was entitled to seniority in accordance with the 1980 Rules, which were given retrospective effect, and clarified that the right of reservation was maintained during the relevant period.
Fact of the Case:

The appellant sought seniority as a Deputy Collector w.e.f. 22-9-1974 in accordance with the U.P. Non-Technical (Class II) Services (Reservation of Vacancies for Demobilised Officers) Rules, 1980, after being released from the Army on 30-11-1979. The High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking seniority.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of seniority in accordance with the 1980 Rules, which were given retrospective effect, and clarified that the right of reservation was maintained during the relevant period. The appeal was allowed with all consequential benefits.
Issues: Entitlement to seniority under the U.P. Non-Technical (Class II) Services (Reservation of Vacancies for Demobilised Officers) Rules, 1980, for an officer released from the Army in 1979.
Ratio Decidendi: The appellant was entitled to seniority in accordance with the 1980 Rules, which were given retrospective effect, and the right of reservation was maintained during the relevant period.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed with all consequential benefits. No costs were awarded.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. We have heard the counsel on both sides. The Government, exercising its power under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, issued U.P. Non-Technical (Class II) Services (Reservation of Vacancies for Demobilised Officers) Rules, 1973. The same Rules were reissued in 1980. These Rules would be applicable to officers of Short Service Commission or Commissioned Officers recruited to the Army between 1-11-1962 to 10-1-1968; and on 3-12-1971 and released at any time thereafter. Admittedly, the appellant was commissioned on 22-9-1974 and was released on 30-11-1979. Advertisement was made for recruitment of Deputy Collectors on 2-5-1979. The appellant had applied for and was selected as a Deputy Collector. He sought for seniority w.e.f. 22-9-1974 in terms of Rule 5 of 1980 Rules. Since it was not given, he filed WP No. 2469 of 1989 and the High Court of Allahabad dismissed the writ petition on 25-4-1994. Thus, this appeal by special leave.

3. It is not in dispute that the Rules have been given retrospective effect and, therefore, the appellant is entitled to the benefit of seniority in accordance with Rule 5 of 1980 Rules. It was contended in the High Court that since 1973 Rules were withdrawn w.e.f. 6-8-1978, the appellant is not entitled to the benefit when he was recruited in the year 1979. That appears to be obviously a mistaken stand taken by the Government, since 1980 Rules have been given retrospective effect w.e.f. 6-8-1978. Thereby even 1973 Rules must be deemed to be in operation till 1980 Rules were framed afresh. As per the memorandum, Annexure II, which is now made part of the record, the Government have clarified that all benefits, except the reservation, were withdrawn by the notification issued w.e.f. 6-8-1978. In other words, even the right of reservation was maintained during interregnum. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to the seniority as per 1980 Rules.

4. The appeal is accordingly allowed with all consequential benefits. No costs.

For Citation: 1995(4) SCC 495

Click Here to Read the rest of this document