2016 Supreme(SC) 472

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dipak Misra, Shiva Kirti Singh, JJ.
V. Venkata Prasad & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
High Court of A.P. & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6105 OF 2013
Decided On : 29-06-2016

IMPORTANT POINTS
No rights accrue to ad hoc recruits for regular promotion.
Appointees under rule 2(i) of Andhra Pradesh State Higher Judicial Service Special Rules for Adhoc Appointments, 2001 will not be members of permanent cadre covered under Rule 2 of the Special Rules for Andhra Pradesh State Higher Judicial Service, 1958.
Persons appointed on ad hoc basis and to a post under a scheme cannot claim to be member of permanent service.
Period of ad hoc appointment cannot be counted towards seniority.

Headnote:(a) Fast Track Courts – Appointment of judges to Fast Track Courts – Under Andhra Pradesh State Higher Judicial Service Special Rules for Ad hoc Appointments, 2001 – Ad hoc in nature – No rights accrue to ad hoc recruits for regular promotion. (Para 19)

       (2002) 5 SCC 1; (2002) 4 SCC 247; (2002) 4 SCC 578; (1992) 1 SCC 119; (1993) 4 SCC 288; (2012) 6 SCC 502 – Relied upon

       (1952) SCR 135; (1978) 1 SCC 405; (1967) 2 SCR 325; (1993) 3 SCC 307 – Referred

       (b) Andhra Pradesh State Higher Judicial Service Special Rules for Adhoc Appointments, 2001 – Rule 7(1)(b) – Appointees under rule 2(i) will not be members of permanent cadre covered under Rule 2 of the Special Rules for Andhra Pradesh State Higher Judicial Service, 1958. (Para 22)

       (2002) 5 SCC 1; (2012) 6 SCC 502 – Relied upon

       (c) Service law – Judicial service – For becoming member of the service – Appointment in substantive capacity and to a post in the service is mandatory – Persons appointed on ad hoc basis and to a post under a scheme – Cannot claim to be member of permanent service. (Para 23)

       (2013) 3 SCC 658; (1984) 4 SCC 450 – Relied upon

       (d) Service law – Seniority – Period of ad hoc appointment – Cannot be counted towards seniority. (Para 28)

       (1990) 2 SCC 715; (1993) 3 SCC 371; (2012) 8 SCC 633; (1984) 4 SCC 450 – Relied upon

       (e) Service law – Regularisation and promotion – Appellants promoted under Fats Track court scheme framed under 2001 rules – Regularised on regular posts falling vacant – Prior to that, persons directly recruited on substantive posts – Appellants cannot claim seniority over direct recruits. (Para 29)

       (2013) 3 SCC 658; (1984) 4 SCC 450; (2000) 8 SCC 25 – Relied upon

       Facts of the case:

       The appellants were appointed as District Munsifs in Andhra Pradesh Judicial Service in the years 1985-1987 through A.P. Public Service Commission and in due course were promoted as Sub-Judges. Later on their names were recommended for promotion to the post of District and Sessions Judge, Grade II vide letter dated 23.4.2002 by the Registrar General, High Court of A.P. and the said recommendations were approved by the Government in G.O.Ms. No. 64 (LA&J) (SC.F) Department dated 4.5.2002. Their temporary appointments were notified in the said Cadre in G.O.Rt. No. 542 dated 4.5.2002.

       While the appellants were functioning as Sub-Judges, 86 additional posts were sanctioned to be established as Fast Track Courts of which only 44 could be established.

       After the posts were sanctioned, the Andhra Pradesh State Higher Judicial Service Special Rules for Adhoc Appointments, 2001 were framed which came into force with effect from 1.3.2001.

       The Government of Andhra Pradesh approved 36 names for appointment as District & Sessions Judges, Grade II by transfer. Appellant nos. 1 to 5 were posted against vacancies in Fast Track Courts temporarily. Thereafter, appellant nos. 6 and 7 were posted against the vacancies to Fast Track Courts temporarily.

       Respondent nos. 3 to 7 were appointed as District & Sessions Judge, Grade II by direct recruitment. They took charge as District and Sessions Judge, Grade-II at their respective places of postings in January, 2003. The said respondents submitted a representation to the High Court to fix their seniority over and above the District and Sessions Judges promoted by way of transfer from the cadre of Senior Civil Judge. The High Court communicated the seniority list fixing their seniority after one Sh. Mohan Gandhi whose name was at serial no.5. The final seniority list was published vide G.O.Rt. No. 1748 (LA&J SC.F) Department dated 18.9.2008.

       After publication of the final seniority list, the same was challenged before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the Division Bench dismissed the writ petition.

       Finding of the Court:

       There is no merit in the appeal.

       Result: Appeal dismissed.