Back
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :R.BALIA
AJITSINH CHATURJI RATHOD - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
S.C.A. 1367 of 1999
Decided On : 09/13/1999
As a result of such transfer, he takes seniority at the bottom amongst the regularly employed persons in the cadre at the place of transfer on the date of transfer. However, this does not envisage that the period of service for the purpose of seniority in all circumstances to be reckoned with effect from the date of transfer. That is to say, the period of past services in the parent district, he carries with him for the purpose of reckoning the seniority vis-a-vis a person appointed to the services of the district who comes after him. Therefore, it is not possible to accept the contention of learned counsel for the respondents, that, because of the operation of condition of inter district transfer on request, the petitioner is not entitled to compute the period of services rendered at District Panchayat, Surat for the purpose of counting seniority. The limited operation to which the rules provide affecting the seniority is vis-a-vis persons already in the employment at the time of transfer on request or at the time of absorption on being declared surplus in the parent district. He loses seniority not because of not reckoning the period of past services rendered in parent district, but because of securing transfer on request as a condition for acceptance of such request.
[Para 4A]
What is requisite condition is that he should have spent 9 years of regular service which is accountable for the purpose of seniority in one and the same cadre and grade, not necessarily in the present cadre. If a man has served in one district cadre for 4 years and has been transferred to another district cadre at his own request and he has served there for six years, in that event in either of the cadre, he has not completed 9 years service and he cannot take advantage unless the both are clubbed together. In the other case, a person may have served in one cadre for more than 20 years and has been transferred to another cadre by loss of seniority. In such case, he is not deprived of the benefit of the scheme which has to operate from the date of entry in the service at different points when the conditions can be said to be fulfilled. In that event if a person has fulfilled the conditions for availing the benefit at any point, be it before his services are transferred in the present cadre affecting his seniority, there is no provision in the scheme which takes away that benefit because of the subsequent events. This is also in consonance with the object with which the scheme has been introduced.
[Para 6]
The petitioner who entered the services on regular selection in 1964 in the district cadre of Surat and had completed more than 9 years of service before he was transferred to the district cadre of Mehsana in 1986 with all other benefits of service attached with it. The other benefits would include if on extension of any scheme to those services, in future, for such benefits, he carries past service with him. As the petitioner had completed 9 years in the one and same cadre while at Surat in 1973 and he has otherwise fulfilled the conditions of eligibility under the scheme, that benefit cannot be deferred unless he completes the period of 9 years once again in the new cadre also for the purpose of becoming eligible for second time.
[Para 7]
( 1 ) RULE. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has been appointed as an Extension Officer [cooperation] at the District Panchayat, Surat on 27/5/1964. At his own request, the petitioner was transferred from Surat Panchayat to District Panchayat, Mehsana at Chanasama on 1/3/1981. As the transfer from one district to another district has taken place at the request of the petitioner, he was placed at the bottom of seniority amongst the Extension Officers as on that date in the District Panchayat, Mehsana, resulting in that for the purpose of seniority amongst Extension Officer of the District on that date, the length of continuous officiation on the post was not taken as criteria of promotions, but was determined on the basis of special rule governing fixing seniority on being transferred to other district on own request, though for all other purpose, the benefit of past service the petitioner carried with him. Vide Government Resolution dated 5th July 1991, the employees were suffering stagnation who have been given benefits of stepping up to three higher grades on the completion of 9 - 18 - 27 years of service respectively, that is to say, on completion of 9 years of service, an incumbent is to be placed in first higher grade and on completion of 18 years of service, he was to be placed in second higher grade and on completion of 27 years of service, the third higher grade. A Scheme was first introduced vide Government Resolution dated 5/7/91 and modified vide resolution dated 6/5/1992 to give relief against stagnancy in the service that the employees who have completed 9 - 18 - 27 years of service on 1/6/87, shall be admissible at a time first, second and third higher grade respectively and the employee who has not actually completed 9 - 18 27 years on 1/6/87, he shall have benefit of higher grade as and when he completes 9 18 - 27 years and was inhibited by the fact that where an incumbent has already availed of promotions prior to the commencement of the scheme which took effect from 1/06/1987, he shall not be eligible for such benefits. The petitioner had not received any promotions and on the premise that he has completed 27 years service, was given the benefit of all the three higher grades. However, this scheme was modified by another resolution dated 16/8/1994 by restricting the benefit to higher grade scale to only one time benefit on the completion of 9 years of service. The benefits given on the second and third higher grade under the 1991 Scheme were withdrawn. The petitioner was given the benefit of being placed in higher grade with effect from 1/06/1987 inter alia on the ground that he has completed 9 years of service on 27/5/1973 counted from the date of his regular appointment in the District Panchayat of Surat on 27th May 1964. By the impugned order, this date of giving benefit is sought to be withdrawn and advanced to 1st March 1990, on completion of 9 years of service in the District Panchayat, Mehsana with effect from the date he was transferred on his own request to the said district.
( 2 ) THERE is no dispute so far as the withdrawal of benefits of second and third higher grade benefits released to all incumbents of the State under the 1994 Resolution.
( 3 ) THE short issue raised in this petition is whether, in the facts and circumstances of present case, petitioner is entitled to get benefit of the higher grade on completion of 9 years of service with effect from the date of his initial appointment or he is entitled to higher grade on completion of 9 years of service with effect from 1/03/1981.
( 4 ) THE relevant clause of the resolution dated 16th August 1994 governing the transfer controversy reads as under :-3. 2 the First H. G. S. shall be granted to the employee who has completed 9 years of service in the respective cadre and pay scale provided that the said employee should not have got more than two promotions prior to this. For the purpose of granting the Higher Grad
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
