SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1967 Supreme(SC) 366

Supreme Court Of India
ANAND PRAKASH SAKSENA
Versus
Union of India
Decided On : December 14, 1967

The rules and regulations governing the seniority of special recruits and promotees in the Indian Administrative Service were valid and did not violate Articles 14, 16, or 311 of the Constitution.

Headnote:

ALL INDIA SERVICES - Indian Administrative Service - Seniority - Fixation - Rules and Regulations - Interpretation - Validity - Articles 14, 16 and 311 of the Constitution.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner, a member of the Indian Administrative Service, challenged the seniority assigned to the respondents and the validity of certain rules and regulations governing the seniority of special recruits and promotees in the service.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the rules and regulations in question were valid and did not violate Articles 14, 16, or 311 of the Constitution. The Court also found that the seniority of the respondents was fixed in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations and was not open to challenge.

Issues: 1. Whether the rules and regulations governing the seniority of special recruits and promotees in the Indian Administrative Service were valid and did not violate Articles 14, 16, or 311 of the Constitution. 2. Whether the seniority of the respondents was fixed in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the rules and regulations in question were valid and did not violate Articles 14, 16, or 311 of the Constitution. The Court found that the rules and regulations were not arbitrary or discriminatory and were reasonably related to the object of ensuring a fair and just system of seniority in the service. 2. The Court found that the seniority of the respondents was fixed in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations and was not open to challenge.

Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petition and held that the seniority of the respondents was fixed in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations and was not open to challenge.

Judgment

R. S. BACHAWAT, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is a member of the Indian Administrative Service having been appointed to a junior post therein on 2/04/1952 on the basis of a competitive examination held by the Union Public Service Commission in the year 1951. He completed his probation on 2/10/1953. He was originally allotted to the Madhya Bharat Cadre of the Indian Administrative Service which along with the former Vindhya Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh Cadres, merged in the present Madhya Pradesh Cadre of Indian Administrative Service constituted on 1/11/1956. He was appointed to officiate in a senior post on 17/11/1956. In the gradation list published on 1/01/1966, his number is 70. In this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution he claims that (a) he had the right to hold a post in the senior scale of pay from 2/04/1952 up to 17/11/1956 under the relevant rules read in the light of the decision in P. C. Wadhwa v. Union of India, 1964 (4) SCR 598: (AIR 1964 SC 423) and that (b) he is entitled to a higher place in the gradation list. He asks for the issue of appropriate writs declaring his rights and giving him consequential reliefs.

( 2 ) THE Madhya Bharat Cadre of the Indian Administrative Service was constituted on 1/06/1951 under the Indian Administrative Service Extension to States Scheme. The cadre included all senior posts. A number of junior and training posts were provided, to he held by officers recruited to the cadre before they acquired the experience and seniority necessary for holding senior posts. The initial constitution of the cadre was made from (1) the existing incumbents and (2) emergency recruits. The existing incumbents were considered to be the first and primary source of recruitment. They were selected by a Special Recruitment Board and divided in three lists. Officers in List I were considered fit for immediate appointment to the Service. Officers in List II were to continue to hold their present posts, their work was to be watched for 5 years and were to be absorbed in the Service as and when they were found fit. Officers in List III were to hold their present posts or posts of equivalent rank until they retired but they were not to be absorbed in the Service. The posts held by officers in Lists II and III were excluded from the cadre for the period during which they were held by those officers. The cadre was to be maintained on a permanent basis by (a) direct recruitment on the result of the competitive examination and (b) promotion from amongst officers of the State Civil Service. As in the case of the Provincial cadres. 25 per cent of the senior posts were earmarked for promotion of officers of the State Civil Service.

( 3 ) ON 1/06/1951, the number of senior posts in the Madhya Bharat cadre was 25. On selection by the Special Recruitment Board 6 officers were placed in List I and were appointed to the Service from 1/01/1951 officers were placed in List II and 11 officers were placed in List III and they continued to hold their posts under the Extension to States Scheme. The remaining 4 senior posts were held by 4 emergency recruits. On 2/04/1952, there was thus no available vacancy for the petitioner in the senior posts. As a matter of fact, 2 direct recruits senior to the petitioner were in the junior scale of pay.

( 4 ) IN September 1954, the Central Government framed the I. A. S. Cadre Rules, 1954, I. A. S. Recruitment Rules, 1954, I. A. S. Pay Rules, 1954 and I. A. S. Regulation of Seniority Rules, 1954 in exercise of its powers under S. 3 (1) of the All India Services Act, 1951. These rules were amended from time to time. Under R. 2 (a) of the Cadre Rules, a cadre officer means a member of the Indian Administrative Service. Under R. 2 (b), a cadre post means a senior cadre post under the State Government. Under R. 3, an I. A. S. cadre is constituted for each State or group of States. Under R. 4, the strength and composition of each cadre is determined by regulations made by the Centr




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top