Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, Indu Malhotra, JJ.
WARAD MURTI MISHRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.2601 OF 2020 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No. 14036 of 2019) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.2602 OF 2020 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No. 13973 of 2019) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.2603 OF 2020 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No. 14134 of 2019) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.2604 OF 2020 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No. 14083 of 2019) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.2605 OF 2020 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No. 22167 of 2019) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.2606 OF 2020 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No. 26080 of 2019)
Decided On : 15-06-2020
Service Law – Seniority – Direct Recruits and Promotees – If period of probation of any direct recruit is extended, appointing authority should determine date from which candidate should be assigned seniority – Until probation period is completed and he is confirmed in the post, he does not become a member of service on successful completion of probation and passing of prescribed tests or conditions precedent to declaration of completion of probation period – Mere passage of time of one year does not entitle a probationer to be a member of service – He remains to be on temporary service – On completion of probation period, appointing authority should confirm him in a pending post available or grant him a quasi-permanent status – As soon as post is available, he should be confirmed – While issuing Seniority List, Appellant and similarly situated persons were declared as confirmed/permanent on the date when they had cleared examination, which incidentally was later than date of confirmation of officers in subsequent selection – Relevant order also dealt with cases of certain officials who had not cleared departmental examination in initial period of two years, but had cleared concerned examination within extended period – However, effect of Rule 13 of 1975 Rules was not considered on earlier occasions – Since Division Bench has now made reference to a larger bench, Court do not propose to enter into the matter and decide controversy but leave it to High Court to consider and decide all issues – Matters shall first be placed before a Bench of three Judges, which may consider whether decision of Full Bench on earlier occasion requires reconsideration – Bench may consider effect of non-consideration of Rule 13 of 1975 Rules on earlier occasion as well as impact of decisions of this Court on controversy in question. [Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961 – Rules 8 and 12(1); Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Service (Classification, Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1975 – Rules 13 and 23; Madhya Pradesh Government Servants (Temporary and Quasi-Permanent Service) Rules, 1960 – Rules 2 and 3] (Paras 5, 14, 17 and 19)
Facts of the case:
Present Appeals arise out of the final judgment and order dated 30.05.2019 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal Seat at Jabalpur in Writ Petition No. 1712 of 2018 and other connected matters. Status of the Appellant and similarly situated persons, who could not clear the examination even within the extended period of probation, is the matter in issue, raising the question whether the persons selected in subsequent selection processes, who had cleared the departmental examination within the stipulated period, should rank senior to the Appellant and similarly situated persons.
Findings of the Court:
It is true that the decisions of the Division Bench and the Full Bench were challenged and not only the Special Leave Petitions but the Review Petitions were also dismissed. But as observed by the Division Bench in the instant case, the effect of Rule 13 of 1975 Rules was not considered on the earlier occasions. Since the Division Bench has now made a reference to a larger bench, we do not propose to enter into the matter and decide the controversy but leave it to the High Court to consider and decide all the issues.
Result : Appeals disposed of in terms.
JUDGMENT
Uday Umesh Lalit, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These Appeals arise out of the final judgment and order dated 30.05.2019 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal Seat at Jabalpur in Writ Petition No. 1712 of 2018 and other connected matters. For facility, the facts in the lead matter viz. Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No. 14036 of 2019 are set out in detail hereinafter.
3. The Appellant in the lead matter joined the service as Deputy Collector on 01.07.1996 after being selected by the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission. The Appellant was initially put on probation for two years and was required to clear a departmental examination within that period. In terms of the concerned Rules, the probation period can be extended for one year but the departmental examination must be cleared during the extended period. The Appellant could, however, clear the examination on 28.01.2001 that is more than three years after the initial appointment.
Consequently, the status of the Appellant and similarly situated persons, who could not clear the examination even within the extended period of probation, is the matter in issue, raising the question whether the persons selected in subsequent selection processes, who had cleared the departmental examination within the stipulated period, should rank senior to the Appellant and similarly situated persons.
4. The Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1961 Rules’) apply to every person holding a post or who is a member of a service in the State, except certain categories in Rule 3. Rule 8 deals with ‘Probation’, Rule 12 deals with ‘Seniority’, Rule 12(1) deals with ‘Seniority of Direct Recruits and Promotees’, Rule 12 (2) deals with ‘Seniority of Transferees’, Rule 12 (3) deals with ‘Seniority in special types of cases’ and Rule 12(4) deals with ‘Seniority of Ad hoc employees’. Since we are concerned in the present matter with seniority of Direct Recruits and Promotees, Rules 8 and 12(1) are set out hereunder:-
“8. Probation.- (1) A person appointed to a service or post by direct recruitment shall ordinarily be placed on probation for such period as may be prescribed.
(2) The appointing authority may, for sufficient reasons, extend the period of probation by a further period not exceeding one year.
(3) A probationer shall undergo such training and pass such departmental examination during the period of his probation as may be prescribed.
(4) The services of a probationer may be terminated during the period of probation if in the opinion of the appointing authority he is not likely to shape into a suitable Government servant.
(5) The services of a probationer who has not passed the departmental examination or who is found unsuitable for the service or post may be terminated at the end of the period of his probation.
(6) On the successful completion of probation and passing of the prescribed departmental examination, if any, the probationer shall, if there is a permanent post available, be confirmed in the service or post to which he has been appointed, either a certificate shall be issued in his favour by the appointing authority to the effect that the probationer would have been confirmed but for the non-availability of the permanent post and that as soon as a permanent post becomes available he will be confirmed.
(7) A probationer, who has neither been confirmed, nor a certificate issued in his favour under sub-rule (6), nor discharged from service under sub-rule (4), shall be deemed to have been appointed as a temporary Government servant with effect from the date of expiry of probation and his conditions of service shall be governed by the Madhya Pradesh Government Servants (Temporary and Quasi-Permanent Service) Rules, 1960.
… … …
12. Seniority.- The seniority of the members of a service or a distinct branch or group of posts of that service shall be determined in accordance with the following princ
SupremeToday
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
