1. Reversion from a higher post to a lower post after holding the higher position for over a decade — Challenge against order of reversion. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1996 Supreme(SC) 799
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Faizan Uddin : Kuldip Singh
M.A.Hameed
Versus
State Of A.P.
Date of Decision : 4/17/96
Important Points
Reversion of an employee from a higher post after they have held that position for a prolonged period (over a decade) is unjustified. Any irregularities in the appointment should be corrected within a reasonable timeframe.
Subject
Service Law - Promotion and Reversion
Headnote
(A) Service Law - Reversion from higher post - Reversion of an employee from a higher post after holding the same for more than a decade is wholly unjustified - If an appointment is temporary or irregular, the employee should be reverted within a reasonable period. (Para 1)
Facts of the case:
An employee was promoted to the post of District Inspector of Local Funds (Accounts) and served in that capacity for over eleven years. Subsequently, an order was passed reverting the employee to the post of Senior Auditor. The respondent contended that the promotion was temporary and made without considering senior persons. The employee challenged this reversion before the Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed the application.
Findings of Court:
The reversion after a period of eleven years is unjustified and does more harm than good. While the employee is not entitled to back wages due to retirement upon superannuation, the pay should be fixed notionally in the higher rank for the purpose of post-retirement benefits, including revised pension.
Issues: Whether the reversion of an employee from a higher post after serving in that capacity for eleven years is legally sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Reversion from a higher post after a prolonged period is unjustified; any irregularities in the appointment should be addressed and corrected within a reasonable timeframe.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Facts of the case:
An employee was promoted to the post of District Inspector of Local Funds (Accounts) and served in that capacity for over eleven years. Subsequently, an order was passed reverting the employee to the post of Senior Auditor. The respondent contended that the promotion was temporary and made without considering senior persons. The employee challenged this reversion before the Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed the application.
Findings of Court:
The reversion after a period of eleven years is unjustified and does more harm than good. While the employee is not entitled to back wages due to retirement upon superannuation, the pay should be fixed notionally in the higher rank for the purpose of post-retirement benefits, including revised pension.
Issues: Whether the reversion of an employee from a higher post after serving in that capacity for eleven years is legally sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Reversion from a higher post after a prolonged period is unjustified; any irregularities in the appointment should be addressed and corrected within a reasonable timeframe.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. State contends the appointment was temporary and lacked consideration of seniority — No right to hold the post. (Para 1 )
3. Reversion after holding a higher post for over a decade is unjustified — Irregularities should be corrected within a reasonable period. (Para 1 )
4. Reversion from a higher post after a prolonged period of service is unjustified, regardless of the temporary or irregular nature of the initial appointment. (Para 1 )
5. Appeal allowed — Reversion order set aside — Notional pay fixation for retirement benefits and revised pension granted — Back wages denied. (Para 1 )
6. Is reversion from a higher post justified if the appointment was temporary or irregular?
No, if the employee has held the higher post for a significant period, such as over a decade, reversion is unjustified. Any irregularity in the appointment should have been corrected within a reasonable period. (Para 1 )
7. When should an employer act to revert an employee appointed to a post irregularly or temporarily?
If an appointment is temporary or irregular, the employer should effect the reversion within a reasonable period rather than after the employee has held the post for many years. (Para 1 )
8. Can a court grant retirement benefits without awarding back wages after setting aside a reversion order?
Yes, the court may order notional pay fixation in the higher rank for the purpose of post-retirement benefits and revised pension, while declining back wages based on the facts and circumstances of the case. (Para 1 )
KULDIP SINGH, J.
(1) THE appellant was appointed as temporary Lower Division Auditor (Junior Auditor) on 1-12-1961. He was regularised in the said post w.e.f. 22-10-1969. He was promoted as temporary Upper Division Auditor (Senior Auditor) on 11-5-1970 and was regularised in the said post on 1-7-1972. He was further promoted to the post of District Inspector of Local Funds (Accounts) on 23-8-1971. He continued to work in the said post for more than ten years and finally by the order dated 8-1-1981 was reverted to the post of Senior Auditor. The appellant challenged the order of reversion before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the application. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the respondent State of A.P. contends that the appellant was holding the post of District Inspector of Local Funds (Accounts) on a temporary basis and as such he had no right to hold the post. In the counter-affidavit filed before this Court it is stated that at the time when the appellant was promoted the senior persons had left Telangana area and as such his promotion was without considering the senior persons. We are of the view that the reversion of the appellant after he held the higher post for more than a decade was wholly unjustified. If his appointment was temporary or irregular in any manner he should have been reverted within a reasonable period. Even after the reversion order was passed the appellant continued to hold the post till 1985 under the stay order granted by the Tribunal. We are, therefore, of the view that the reversion of the appellant from the post of District Inspector of Local Funds (Accounts) after a period of 11 years has done more harm than good. We, therefore, allow the appeal and set aside the order of reversion. Mr B. Kanta Rao states that the appellant retired on attaining superannuation in September 1993. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case we are not inclined to give back wages to the appellant from the date of his reversion in the year 1985 till the date of his retirement. The respondent shall fix the pay of the appellant in the rank of District Inspector of Local Fund (Accounts) notionally on the date of retirement for the purpose of post-retirement benefits. The respondents shall fix the revised pension to which the appellant is entitled within three months from the receipt of this order. He shall be entitled to revised enhanced pension from the date of his retirement. The respondent shall pay the arrears of pension to the respondent within further period of one month. The appeal is allowed in the above terms. No costs.
