SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.M. LODHA, J. CHELAMESWAR, MADAN B. LOKUR, JJ.
DEBABRATA DASH AND ANR. – Appellants.
VERSUS
JATINDRA PRASAD DAS & ORS. – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2316 of 2013 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 192 of 2012)
Decided On : 11-3-2013.
Constitution of India,1950 - Articles 233 and 234 - Rule 8, Orissa Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963 – Promotion – Appointment to Orissa Superior Judicial Service - Petition filed by respondent before the High Court principal question consideration was whether service rendered by him (writ petitioner) in Fast Track Court as Additional District Judge is to be taken into account while fixing his seniority after regularization of his service Senior Branch cadre Orissa Superior Judicial Service Rules High Court in impugned judgment has answered the above question in favour of the writ petitioner allowed writ petition and directed Orissa High Court on administrative side to treat the period of service rendered by the writ petitioner in Fast Track Court for purpose of seniority from the date of his joining post and re-fix his seniority in light of judgment –Held, Court should quash the advertisement issued by State of Orissa for making selections to the Orissa Higher Judicial Services on basis of claims for of petitioners against such posts - are two different sets of Rules applicable in different situations to these two different classes of officers and further they are governed by different conditions of service - They cannot be placed on par - process of their appointments is distinct and different - Court observed that the Fast Track Court Judges were appointed under a separate set of rules than rules governing the regular appointment to the State Higher Judicial Service - Court noted that while appointing Fast Track Court Judges - it was clearly stipulated such appointments would be ad hoc and temporary and that the appointees shall not derive any benefit from such appointments - We have already indicated above that on there was no vacancy cadre of Superior Judicial Service (Senior Branch) for being filled up by promotion. Such vacancy in Senior Branch cadre of service occurred and from that date writ petitioner has been given benefit of his service rendered in Fast Track Court administrative decision by Full Court is accord with Rules and legal position already indicated above view of Division Bench in the impugned judgment is legally unsustainable impugned judgment is liable to be set aside and is set aside – Order accordingly
JUDGMENT
R.M. Lodha, J.:-
Leave granted.
2. The inter se seniority between the appellants and respondent no. 1 in the Senior Branch cadre of Orissa Superior Judicial Service is the subject matter of this appeal.
3. In the writ petition filed by the respondent no.1 before the High Court, the principal question under consideration was whether the service rendered by him (writ petitioner) in the Fast Track Court as Additional District Judge is to be taken into account while fixing his seniority after regularization of his service in the Senior Branch cadre under the Orissa Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963 (for short, “1963 Rules”). The High Court in the impugned judgment dated 15.11.2011 has answered the above question in favour of the writ petitioner, allowed the writ petition and directed the Orissa High Court on administrative side to treat the period of service rendered by the writ petitioner in the Fast Track Court for the purpose of seniority from the date of his joining the post i.e., 26.04.2002 and re-fix his seniority in light of the judgment.
4. The appellants, direct recruits, who were respondent nos. 3 and 4 in the writ petition, have challenged the above judgment principally on the ground that it is not consistent with the 1963 Rules, Orissa Judicial Service (Special Schemes) Rules, 2001 and Orissa Superior Judicial Service and Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 2007. The appellants contend that the High Court has not correctly applied the decisions of this Court in O.P Singla and Another v. Union of India and Others[(1984) 4 SCC 450], Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers’ Association v. State of Maharashtra and Others[(1990) 2 SCC 715], Rudra Kumar Sain and Others v. Union of India and Others[(2000) 8 SCC 25], Brij Mohan Lal v. Union of India and Others[(2002) 5 SCC 1] [Brij Mohan Lal 1] and Brij Mohan Lal v. Union of India and Others[(2012) 6 SCC 502] [Brij Mohan Lal 2].
5. The brief facts leading to the controversy are these: The writ petitioner joined the judicial service in the State of Orissa as Munsiff on probation on 15.07.1981 under the Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 1964. He was promoted to the Junior Branch of the Superior Judicial Service on 19.07.1999. On 05.01.2002, the writ petitioner, who was continuing as a member of Superior Judicial Service (Junior Branch), was appointed, on ad hoc basis, as Additional District Judge in the Fast Track Court. Pursuant to the above order of appointment, on 11.04.2002 writ petitioner was posted as an ad hoc Additional District Judge in the Fast Track Court at Bargarh where he joined on 26.04.2002.
6. On 13.01.2003, the appellants were appointed in the Senior Branch cadre of Orissa Superior Judicial Service by way of direct recruitment under the 1963 Rules. Pursuant to the posting order dated 22.01.2003, they joined as Additional District and Sessions Judges at Cuttack and Behrampur on 03.02.2003 and 07.02.2003 respectively.
7. By an order dated 28.05.2003, the tenure of writ petitioner as ad hoc Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Bargarh was extended for a further period of one year or 31.03.2004 (whichever was earlier).
8. By a notification dated 15.12.2003, the writ petitioner was allowed to officiate in the Senior Branch of the Superior Judicial Service on regular basis on account of a vacancy that arose due to retirement of an officer of the Senior Branch on 31.07.2003. The writ petitioner was posted on 19.01.2004 as Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bargarh pursuant to the notification dated 15.12.2003 to which post the writ petitioner joined on 03.02.2004.
9. Appellant no. 1 was confirmed in the cadre of Senior Branch, Superior Judicial Service with effect from 03.02.2004 while appellant no. 2 was confirmed with effect from 07.02.2004. The appellants were conferred selection grade with effect from 03.02.2008 and 07.02.2008 respectively.
10. The writ petitioner was substantively appointed in the cadre of District Judge with effect from 1
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.