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

2023 Supreme(Del) 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Ram Nagina Prasad & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 5259 of 2019 & CM Appls.23260 of 2019; 38322 of 2022 & 38323 of 2022, W.P.(C) 8454 of 2019 & CM Appls. 34889 of 2019; 34892 of 2019; 32074 of 2022 & 38474 of 2022 and W.P.(C) 8616 of 2019 & CM Appls. 35622 of 2019; 35625 of 2019; 32075 of 2022; 38603 of 2022 & 38604 of 2022
Decided On : 07-02-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate, for the Petitioner in W.P.(C) 5259 of 2019 & CM Appls.23260 of 2019; 38322 of 2022 & 38323 of 2022.
Ms. Nidhi Raman CGSC with Mr. Zubin Singh, Advocate, for the Respondent No.1 in W.P.(C) 5259 of 2019 & CM Appls.23260 of 2019; 38322 of 2022 & 38323 of 2022.
Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Ms. Tania Ahlawat, Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik & Ms. Aliza Alam, Advocates, for the Respondents No. 2 to 5 and 7 to 56 in W.P.(C) 5259 of 2019 & CM Appls.23260 of 2019; 38322 of 2022 & 38323 of 2022 & for the Respondent No.1 to 56 (except No. 45) in W.P.(C) 8454/2019 & CM APPLs.34889/2019; 34892/2019; 32074/2022 & 38474/2022 & for the Respondents No.1 to 34 in W.P.(C) 8616/2019 & CM APPL.35622/2019; 35625/2019; 32075/2022; 38603/2022 & 38604/2022.
Ms. Jyoti Dutta Sharma, Mr. C.K. Bhatt, Mr. Himanshu Gautam & Mr. Ayush Bhatt, Advocates, for the Respondent No. 46 in W.P.(C) 5259 of 2019 & CM Appls.23260 of 2019; 38322 of 2022 & 38323 of 2022.
Ms. Bharathi Raju Senior Panel Counsel with Mr. Rohit Singh, Advocate & Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Central Government Standing Counsel in W.P.(C) 8454/2019 & CM APPLs.34889/2019; 34892/2019; 32074/2022 & 38474/2022.
Ms. Jyoti Dutta Sharma & Mr. Ayush Bhatt, Advocates, for the Respondent No.45 in W.P.(C) 8454/2019 & CM APPLs.34889/2019; 34892/2019; 32074/2022 & 38474/2022.
Mr. Prateek Dhanda, Advocate, for the Respondent No.57 to Respondent No.62 in W.P.(C) 8454/2019 & CM APPLs.34889/2019; 34892/2019; 32074/2022 & 38474/2022 & for the Respondent No.35 to 40 in W.P.(C) 8616/2019 & CM APPL.35622/2019; 35625/2019; 32075/2022; 38603/2022 & 38604/2022.
Arun Bhardwaj, Central Government Standing Counsel in W.P.(C) 8616/2019 & CM APPL.35622/2019; 35625/2019; 32075/2022; 38603/2022 & 38604/2022.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that promotions granted based on the O.M. dated 03.05.2012, which extended the Select List Year 2003 of UDCs, indicated a fair method of filling up posts. The court also emphasized that retrospective seniority cannot be given to a promotee so as to affect the seniority rights of an existing member of a cadre.

Headnote:

Seniority Quota - Central Secretariat Clerical Service - CSCS Rules, 1962, O.M. dated 03.05.2012 - The judgment pertains to the determination of seniority of UDCs in the Central Secretariat Clerical Service (CSCS) under the Seniority Quota and Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) Quota. The court analyzed the O.M. dated 03.05.2012, which extended the Select List Year 2003 of UDCs by including the names of additional 2151 UDCs against the vacancies caused in the grade of UDCs for the Select List Year 2003. The court found that the promotions granted were based on the O.M. dated 03.05.2012, which indicated a fair method of filling up posts. The court also considered the decisions in Ravinder Kumar Jha and Pankaj Kumar Mishra, where it was held that retrospective seniority cannot be given to a promotee so as to affect the seniority rights of an existing member of a cadre. The court directed the respondents to implement the O.M. dated 03.05.2012 and place those LDCs who have been promoted to the post of UDC after accrual of 2151 vacancies below those who have been promoted to the post of UDC in the years 2004-2009, whether under Promotion Quota or LDCE Quota.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a dispute over the determination of seniority of UDCs in the Central Secretariat Clerical Service (CSCS) under the Seniority Quota and Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) Quota. The dispute arose from the promotions granted based on the O.M. dated 03.05.2012, which extended the Select List Year 2003 of UDCs by including the names of additional 2151 UDCs against the vacancies caused in the grade of UDCs for the Select List Year 2003.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the promotions granted were based on the O.M. dated 03.05.2012, which indicated a fair method of filling up posts. The court also considered the decisions in Ravinder Kumar Jha and Pankaj Kumar Mishra, where it was held that retrospective seniority cannot be given to a promotee so as to affect the seniority rights of an existing member of a cadre. The court directed the respondents to implement the O.M. dated 03.05.2012 and place those LDCs who have been promoted to the post of UDC after accrual of 2151 vacancies below those who have been promoted to the post of UDC in the years 2004-2009, whether under Promotion Quota or LDCE Quota.

Issues: The main issue was the determination of seniority of UDCs in the Central Secretariat Clerical Service (CSCS) under the Seniority Quota and Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) Quota, based on the O.M. dated 03.05.2012.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the promotions granted were based on the O.M. dated 03.05.2012, which indicated a fair method of filling up posts. The court also considered the decisions in Ravinder Kumar Jha and Pankaj Kumar Mishra, where it was held that retrospective seniority cannot be given to a promotee so as to affect the seniority rights of an existing member of a cadre. The court directed the respondents to implement the O.M. dated 03.05.2012 and place those LDCs who have been promoted to the post of UDC after accrual of 2151 vacancies below those who have been promoted to the post of UDC in the years 2004-2009, whether under Promotion Quota or LDCE Quota.

Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to implement the O.M. dated 03.05.2012 and place those LDCs who have been promoted to the post of UDC after accrual of 2151 vacancies below those who have been promoted to the post of UDC in the years 2004-2009, whether under Promotion Quota or LDCE Quota.

JUDGMENT

Suresh Kumar Kait, J. The above captioned first and second petitions [W.P.(C) 5259/2019 & W.P.(C) 8454/2019] have been preferred by the petitioners seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing of order dated 09.01.2019 in O.A.639/2016 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Branch, New Delhi (henceforth referred to as the "Tribunal").

2. The above captioned third petition [W.P.(C) 8616/2019] has been preferred by petitioner-Union of India seeking quashing of order dated 09.01.2019 in O.A. 4700/2015 passed by CAT.

3. Since challenge in these petitions is to common impugned order dated 09.01.2019 passed by the Tribunal, therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, these petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

4. The background of these petitions, as spelt out in W.P.(C) 5259/2019, is that Central Secretariat Clerical Service (`CSCS.) in the Central Secretariat has two grades of posts viz. Junior Secretariat Assistant (JSA) and Senior Secretariat Assistant (SSA) and is governed by CSCS Rules, 1962. That is the only feeder cadre for Central Secretariat Service (`CSS.) which includes the post of Assistant Section Officer, Section Officer, Under Secretary, Deputy Secretary and Director; they are governed by CSS Rules, 2009. A separate cadre unit has been constituted in respect of both services i.e. CSCS and CSS for each Ministry of Government of India and DOPT is the Cadre Controlling Authority in respect of them.

5. Prior to implementation of the recommendation of First Cadre Restructuring Committee of CSS, 85% of JSAs inducted in Select List of every year were recruited through Staff Selection Commission on all India basis and top rankers in the examination were posted in the Central Secretariat as erstwhile Lower Divisional Clerks (LDC). Direct recruitment for this post had been stopped for the Select List 2000 onward vide DoPT O.M. dated No.9/2/2003-CS-II dated 20.04.2005.

6. The promotions are made in Central Secretariat Services each year through Select List and as per rules, the Select List for a year consists of the vacancies arising during the period from 1st July of that year to 30th June of the following year. The promotional post for JSA of Central Secretariat Clerical Service is the post of SSA which is filled up by two modes of promotion viz 75% by seniority-cum-fitness from eligible JSAs having 8 years of approved service in the post and 25% from JSAs having rendered 5 years of services in the post through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE).

7. It is further averred in the petition that Government of India constituted a Committee in 2001 which submitted their report in February, 2002. This was the first such committee who made recommendations for restructuring of the cadre of CSS including its feeder cadre of CSCS. Pursuant to the recommendations of the Committee and with approval of cabinet as well as DoPT, new posts in Central Secretariat Services were added in the total sanctioned strength of Director, Deputy Secretary, Under Secretary and Section Officer of CSS, which were considered from the select list of 2003 and promotions in all the aforesaid Grades were made from time to time between 2005 to 2009 from the said Select List of the year 2003.

8. Thereafter, the Government of India constituted another committee in April, 2009 to ascertain the exact vacancies arising against Select List Year of the 2003 in the erstwhile Assistant Grade. According to the committee, there existed 2151 (1469 chain of vacancies percolated down from promotions in higher posts and 682 vacancies restored) vacancies and it recommended to fill up these vacancies. The DoPT filled up these 2151 vacancies from eligible erstwhile UDC out of the Select List of 2003. Thereafter, the Unions requested to DoPT to fill up the 2151 chain vacancies to the grade of UDC from the erstwhile stagnating LDCs as per Select List of th

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