Important point
According to the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services Rules, the appointing authority has to decide as to from what date the direct recruit is to be assigned.

Headnote:Service Law—Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963—Rules 8 and 12—Seniority—Probation—Date of confirmation—Appointing authority has to decide as to from what date the direct recruit is to be assigned—Seniority can be assigned by taking the relevant date to be the date of expiry of normal period of probation—Appellant was appointed on 1.1.1989 on probation and original probation period ended on 1.5.1991—Even during the extended period of probation appellant did not succeed in departmental examination and only on 22.7.1992 he passed the departmental examination—Date of confirmation was accordingly taken to be 23.7.1992—Appellant’s grievance that those persons who had passed the departmental examination within the extended period of one year were placed higher in the seniority list of 2002 by fixing their notional date of confirmation on the day the original period of probation was over—State’s case that only from the date an employee passes the departmental examination, the confirmation takes place—Whether CAT and High Court were justified in rejecting appellant’s claim—(Yes)—Unless the employee passes departmental examination, there is no question of completion of probation.
Held : A bare reading of sub-clause (ii) of Clause (a) of Rule 12 makes the position clear that the appointing authority has to decide as to from what date the direct recruit is to be assigned. It has to be decided whether seniority as assigned to him if he had been confirmed on the expiry of the normal period of probation or whether he should be assigned a lower seniority. The original probation period is two years. Therefore, a combined reading of Rules 8, 12 of the Rules and 13 of Executive Rules makes the position clear that seniority can be assigned by taking the relevant date to be the date of expiry of normal period of probation. In the case of Ram Rao Bhosley, it was 8.5.1992. So far as the appellant is concerned, the appointing authority has been given power to determine the date from which the candidate should be assigned seniority if the period of probation of any direct recruit is extended depending on the date of his passing the departmental examination. (Para 10)

Judgment

Arijit Pasayat, J.—Leave granted.

2. Appellant calls in question legality of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur affirming the order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal (in short ‘CAT’) holding that the appellant’s claim of seniority vis-a-vis that of one Ram Rao Bhosley was untenable.

3. Factual position is undisputed and relates to appellant’s seniority vis-a-vis others. Though grievance was made in the Original Application before the CAT and the High Court that his seniority was affected by placing juniors above him, no such junior was impleaded either before CAT or the High Court and in the present appeal. By way of illustration, it has been pointed out that the aforesaid Ram Rao Bhosley was one such instance. It was appellant’s stand that when he passed the departmental examination, the Government should have decided the date from which he was to be confirmed. As no such decision has been taken and no order has been passed his placement in the Gradation list is without any rational basis.

4. Appellant was appointed on 1.1.1989 on probation and original probation period ended on 1.5.1991. There was extension of the period of probation by one year which ended on 1.5.1992. Even during the extended period of probation the appellant did not succeed in the departmental examination and only on 22.7.1992 he passed the departmental examination. The date of confirmation was accordingly taken to be 23.7.1992. The appellant made a grievance that those persons who had passed the departmental examination within the extended period of one year were placed higher in the seniority list of 2002 by fixing their notional date of confirmation on the day the original period of probation was over. According to the appellant such fixation of seniority was contrary to law. The CAT did not accept the plea by placing reliance on judgment of this Court in M.P. Chandoria v. State of M.P. and Ors. (1996(11) SCC 173) and State of M.P. v. Ramkinkar Gupta and Ors. (2000(10) SCC 77). The CAT held that these decisions did not support the stand taken by the appellant and, in fact, substantiated State’s case that only from the date an employee passes the departmental examination (if it is after probation period), the confirmation takes places.

5. In support of the appeal, Mr. Vivek Tankha, learned senior counsel submitted that the view taken by the CAT and the High Court was not correct in view of what has been stated by this Court in M.P. Chandoria and Ramkinkar Gupta cases (supra). With reference to the factual details of Ram Rao Bhosley, it was submitted that though he passed the departmental examination on 29.1.1993 after his initial appointment on 7.5.1990, he was placed senior to the appellant in the Gradation list. This was submitted to be not justified both in fact and in law.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent-State on the other hand supported the judgment of CAT and the High Court.

7. We shall first take note of the factual details so far as the appellant and Ram Rao Bhosley, though he is not a party to test acceptability of appellant’s stand.

Name of the officer Om Prakash Shrivastava Ram Rao Bhosley

Date of appointment 01.05.1989 07.05.1990

Date of completion of 2-years 01.05.1991 07.05.1992 (original Probation Period)

Date of completion of extended 01.05.1992 07.05.1993 period of 1 (one) - year

Date of passing the departmen- 22.07.1992 29.01.1993 tal exams.

Date of confirmation

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2005 Supreme(SC) 674

Important pointAccording to the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services Rules, the appointing authority has to decide as to from what date the direct recruit is to be assigned.

Cases Referred (2)

Important point
According to the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services Rules, the appointing authority has to decide as to from what date the direct recruit is to be assigned.