1991 Supreme(Raj) 804

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
M.B.Sharma, Farooq Hasan, JJ.
M.L. Jain and others - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan and others - Respondent
D.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 4411 of 1988; 4847/88; 4913/88; 75/89; 445/89; 499/89; 696/89; 698/89.
Decided On : 13-08-1991

The date of confirmation of Inspectors Grade-I cannot be changed arbitrarily and without basis, and the seniority of Inspectors Grade-I is determined by the date of their regular appointment on the post of Inspector Grade-II.

Headnote:

SENIORITIY - INSPECTORS GRADE-I (EXECUTIVE) AND (AUDIT) - RAJASTHAN SUBORDINATE CO-OPERATIVE SERVICE (CLASS-I) RULES, 1955 - INTERPRETATION - COMMON SENIORITY LIST - DATE OF CONFIRMATION - CHANGE OF DATE OF CONFIRMATION - ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT BASIS - TRIBUNAL'S ORDER QUASHING CHANGE OF DATE OF CONFIRMATION - UPHELD BY HIGH COURT - SUBSEQUENT ORDER CHANGING SENIORITY LIST BASED ON CHANGED DATE OF CONFIRMATION QUASHED - ORIGINAL SENIORITY LIST RESTORED.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners and respondents were all selected as Inspectors Grade-II (Executive) or (Audit) under the Rajasthan Subordinate Co-operative Service (Class-I) Rules, 1955 (the 1955 Rules). The petitioners were selected earlier than the respondents and were placed higher in the merit list prepared by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC). The petitioners were also promoted to Inspector Grade-I earlier than the respondents and were confirmed on the said post earlier. However, the respondents challenged the seniority list issued in 1973, which showed the petitioners as senior to them, and obtained a direction from the High Court to prepare a common seniority list of Inspectors Grade-II. The State Government issued an order in 1985 changing the date of confirmation of the petitioners and the respondents, which resulted in the respondents being placed senior to the petitioners in the common seniority list. The petitioners challenged the change of date of confirmation before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal), which quashed the change of date of confirmation. The State Government challenged the Tribunal's order before the High Court, but the High Court dismissed the petition. The State Government then implemented the Tribunal's order and issued an order in 1988 modifying the seniority list to reflect the original date of confirmation of the petitioners and the respondents. The petitioners challenged the 1988 order before the High Court.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court held that the Tribunal's order quashing the change of date of confirmation was valid and that the State Government could not change the date of confirmation arbitrarily and without basis. The High Court also held that the petitioners were senior to the respondents at all stages, from the date of their initial appointment to the date of their promotion to Inspector Grade-I, and that the change of date of confirmation could not change their seniority. The High Court further held that the 1988 order changing the seniority list was based on the changed date of confirmation, which was arbitrary and without basis, and therefore the 1988 order was quashed and the original seniority list was restored.

Issues: 1. Whether the Tribunal's order quashing the change of date of confirmation was valid? 2. Whether the State Government could change the date of confirmation arbitrarily and without basis? 3. Whether the petitioners were senior to the respondents at all stages, from the date of their initial appointment to the date of their promotion to Inspector Grade-I? 4. Whether the change of date of confirmation could change the petitioners' seniority? 5. Whether the 1988 order changing the seniority list was based on the changed date of confirmation? 6. Whether the 1988 order was arbitrary and without basis?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Tribunal's order quashing the change of date of confirmation was valid because the State Government could not change the date of confirmation arbitrarily and without basis. 2. The petitioners were senior to the respondents at all stages, from the date of their initial appointment to the date of their promotion to Inspector Grade-I, and the change of date of confirmation could not change their seniority. 3. The 1988 order changing the seniority list was based on the changed date of confirmation, which was arbitrary and without basis, and therefore the 1988 order was quashed and the original seniority list was restored.

Final Decision: The High Court allowed the petitioners' writ petitions, quashed the 1988 order changing the seniority list, and restored the 1985 order under which the common seniority list of Inspectors Grade I (Executive) and (Audit) was published in which the petitioners were shown at a higher place than the respondents. The petitioners were also directed to be given all the consequential benefits within a period of three months.