important point
Well-settled that inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees should be fixed on the basis of quota-and-rota rule/instructions governing the service conditions of the employees.

Headnote:(a)Service Law – Seniority – Seniority is to be reckoned not from the date when the vacancy arose, but from the date on which the appointment is made to the post. (Para 27)
       (2000) 7 SCC 561; (2007) 1 SCC 683 – Relied upon.
       (2004) 6 SCC 729; (1984) 4 SCC 450 – Distinguished.
       (b)Service Law – Seniority – Well-settled that inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees should be fixed on the basis of quota-and-rota rule/instructions governing the service conditions of the employees. (Para 31)
       (2006) 6 SCC 673; 1987 Suppl. SCC 207 – Relied upon.
       Facts of the case:
       1.Smt. Ammini Rajan & Ors. challenged by an O.A. the Select List of Assistants for promotion to the grade of Assistant Civilian Staff Officers and Armed Forces Headquarters (AFHQ) Civil Services for the years 1977, 1978 and 1979 which was circulated vide letter dated 2nd July, 1996; the Select List for the year 1980 which was circulated vide another letter dated 20.09.1996; the Select List for the year 1981 circulated vide letter dated 20.11.1996 and also the Select List of 1982 circulated vide letter dated 14.03.1997 before CAT which was allowed.
       2.The Tribunal, on consideration of the entire material quashed the impugned orders and gave certain directions.
       3.Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the AFHQ (DRs) Civil Service Officers’ Association filed Writ Petition No. 4058 of 2002, the Union of India filed separate Writ Petition No. 5396/2002 and some of the Departmental Promotees ACSOs, namely, Shri K.S. Dhingra and Smt. Ammini Rajan, filed W.P. Nos. 4458/2002 and 62/2003 respectively, whereas AFHQ Civil Services Officers filed C.W.P. No. 18073/2005 in the High Court of Delhi.
       4.The High Court allowed the Writ Petition Nos. 4058/2002 and 5396/2002 by an order dated 14.11.2006 and set aside the order dated 01.04.2002 recorded by the Tribunal in OA No. 1356/1997 with further direction to the respondent-Union of India to determine the issue of seniority in accordance with the judgment of the Tribunal in TA No. 356/1985 dated 20th November, 1992. C.W.P. No. 62/2003 and C.W.P. No. 4458/2002 filed by the DPs were dismissed and CWP No.18073/2005 was disposed of on 15.01.2007 on the basis of direction in the above-said writ petitions.
       Findings of the Court :
       Judgments of the Tribunal and the High Court are not sustainable.
       Result : Appeals allowed to the extent indicated.

judgment

Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J. —

1.Leave granted.

2.The usual question as regards determination of inter se seniority between Direct Recruits (DRs) and Departmental Promotees (DPs) once again falls for consideration in these two appeals by special leave, therefore, for the sake of convenience, they are being heard and decided by this common judgment.

3.These appeals are directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Delhi dated 14th November, 2006 in C.W.P. No. 4058/2002; C.W.P. No. 4458/2002; C.W.P. No. 5396/2002 and C.W.P. No. 62/2003 and order dated 15th January, 2007 in C.W.P. No. 18073/2005, whereby and whereunder the order dated 1st April, 2002 in O.A. No. 1356/1997 (Smt.Ammini Rajan & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.) of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, is set aside.

4.The Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) allowed the said O.A. filed by Smt. Ammini Rajan & Ors. challenging the Select List of Assistants for promotion to the grade of Assistant Civilian Staff Officers (hereinafter referred to as “ACSOs”) and Armed Forces Headquarters(AFHQ) Civil Services for the years 1977, 1978 and 1979 which was circulated vide letter dated 2nd July, 1996; the Select List for the year 1980 which was circulated vide another letter dated 20.09.1996; the Select List for the year 1981 circulated vide letter dated 20.11.1996 and also the Select List of 1982 circulated vide letter dated 14.03.1997. The applicants were also aggrieved by the consequential Seniority List of ACSOs of AFHQ Civil Services prepared by the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short “the DPC”) for the years 1988-89 and 1989-90 respectively for promotion to further grade of Civilian Staff Officers (CSOs). Based on the revised Select List in the grade of ACSOs, the claim of the applicants was that the Select List and the Seniority List for promotion to the grade of CSOs were drawn in contravention of the directions given by the Tribunal in TA No.356/1985 (CW 3/78) rendered in Shri M.G. Bansal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. on 20th November, 1992 and also in violation of AFHQ Civil Services Rules, 1968.

5.The Tribunal, on consideration of the entire material on record, disposed of O.A. No. 1356 of 1997 (Smt. Ammini Rajan’s case) with the following directions:-

(i)Impugned orders Annexure-A-1 and A-2 are quashed. The respondents are directed to determine the seniority between the direct recruits and promotees regularly appointed/promoted within their respective quota by counting the length of continuous officiation in the grade of ACSO from their respective appointment to the substantive vacancies within their quota in accordance with the Rule 16(7) of the AFHQ Rules and Schedule III of the Rules. In the case of promotees ACSO, the length of continuous officiation in the grade will be determined from the date when they are promoted in substantive vacancies in their lawful quota. In case of direct recruits ACSO, their seniority shall be determined from the year in which they joined the service. While determining seniority, respondents are directed to adhere to the DPC year in case of promotee officer and to retain as 1st October to 30th of September of the following year as provided in the rules/regulations.

(ii)Respondents are further directed to prepare single Select List in a year for the ACSO grade and they cannot report to two separate lists for the purpose of merely identifying the Note (2) Schedule III vacancies as the rules do not envisage the same.

(iii)Respondents are further directed that the vacancies of DR quota may be carried forward but while determining the seniority the slots of the vacancies left unfilled by the DR quota shall not be carried forward for the purpose of determining seniority.

(iv)It is further directed that after finalizing the seniority list, the department shall prepare eligibility lists for the purpose of promotion to the next higher grade.

(v)These direction

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2008 Supreme(SC) 285

important pointWell-settled that inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees should be fixed on the basis of quota-and-rota rule/instructions governing the service conditions of the employees.

Cases Referred (5)

important point
Well-settled that inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees should be fixed on the basis of quota-and-rota rule/instructions governing the service conditions of the employees.