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

2026 Supreme(HP) 219

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, J.
Yashpal Dhiman - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others - Respondents
CWPOA No.1026 of 2019
Decided On : 20-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Ms. Vandana Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General, Mr. Manish Sharma, Mr. Ompal and Ms. Ridhima, Advocates

General category candidates senior in feeder cadre regain inter se seniority over earlier promoted reserved category roster-point promotees in higher cadre via catch-up rule, absent rules for consequential seniority.

Headnote:(A) Service Jurisprudence - Promotion and Seniority - Catch-up Rule - Reserved category roster-point promotee promoted earlier to higher cadre does not retain seniority over general category candidates senior in feeder cadre who are promoted later; such general candidates regain inter se seniority in higher cadre on catch-up principle, absent rules or policy granting consequential seniority to reserved promotees - Principles affirmed by Constitution Bench, applicable where instructions provide for regaining of original seniority post-promotion, balancing rights under Articles 14 and 16. (Paras 17-27)

(B) Audi Alteram Partem - No violation of natural justice in revising provisional seniority list to final after considering representations from affected parties, applying settled law on catch-up, without specific hearing to petitioner. (Para 9)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner, belonging to reserved category and junior in entry grade of Junior Engineer, overlooked for 1993 promotions to Assistant Engineer, secured directions for review DPC resulting in promotion w.e.f. 31.12.1991. Placed at Sr.No.2 in provisional seniority list circulated 01.12.2011, but shifted to Sr.No.15 in final list dated 09.07.2012, with private respondents (senior generals in entry grade) placed above, invoking catch-up and instructions dated 27.03.1997.

Findings of Court:
Final seniority list upheld as per settled law and instructions; no interference warranted.

Issues: Whether final seniority list violative of natural justice, contemptuous of prior judgment, and erroneous in application of catch-up rule over reserved promotee's earlier promotion.

Ratio Decidendi: General candidates senior in lower cadre regain seniority in higher cadre upon promotion after reserved roster-point promotee, per catch-up principle upheld in Constitution Bench decision, as no rules for consequential seniority exist and instructions dated 27.03.1997 expressly provide for it; provisional list corrected after representations, adhering to law.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petition challenges seniority downgrade after retrospective sc promotion (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. final list violates natural justice, court order (Para 9 , 10)
3. catch-up rule restores general seniority over reserved (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. undisputed: petitioner junior in entry grade je (Para 15 , 16 , 17)
5. ajit singh ii upholds catch-up against consequential seniority (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
6. no auto consequential seniority without explicit rules (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
7. final list correctly applies 1997 catch-up instructions (Para 25 , 26 , 27)
8. petition dismissed upholding final seniority list (Para 28 , 29)

JUDGMENT :

Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, J.

By way of present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:-

“(a) That the entire record pertaining to the instant case may kindly be summoned and subjected to scrutiny by this Hon’ble Court.

(b) That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the final seniority list appended along with the memorandum dated 09th July, 2012 (Annexure P-6) with all consequences.

(c) That this Hon’ble Court may very kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus and to direct the respondents to redraw the seniority list by restoring the seniority of the present petitioner, above the respondent No.3 herein, as per the tentative seniority list (Annexure P-4) with all consequential benefits arising there from, including promotion etc.”

2. The precise grouse raised by the petitioner in the present petition is that as per the provisional seniority list of Assistant Engineer (Electrical), circulated vide Office Memorandum dated 01.12.2011 (Annexure P-4), he was assigned seniority at serial No.2. However, when the final seniority list was circulated vide Memorandum dated 09.7.2012 (Annexure P-6), his seniority position was changed to Sr. No.15 and private respondents have been shown senior, though, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) earlier to them.

3. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer (Electrical) with the respondent-Department on 17.06.1979. The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste (SC) category.

4. In the year 1993, the respondent-Department decided to fill up 4 posts of Assistant Engineer (Electrical), which is the next promotional post from the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical).

5. Though the petitioner had rendered 7 years of service as Junior Engineer (Electrical) and was eligible for being considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical), but his candidature was not considered, which forced him to approach the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by filing an original application, which was transferred to this Court and registered as CWP(T) No.4067 of 2008, titled, Yash Pal Dhiman vs. State of H.P. and others. This Court had allowed the said petition vide judgment dated 23.12.2010, directing the respondent-Department to convene the review DPC within two months from the date of supply of copy of the judgment and the competent authority shall consider the case of the petitioner as on 12.11.1993 for promotion from the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical) to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) in Scheduled Caste category together with the case of any other eligible Scheduled Caste category Junior Engineer (Electrical) senior to him along with respondents No.3 to 5 in the said writ petition.

6. In sequel to the directions given by this Court, the respondents had promoted the petitioner to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical), vide office order dated 06.07.2011 (Annexure P-2) and his date of promotion was shown as 31.12.1991. After his promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical), the petitioner had made a representation dated 15.07.2011 (Annexure P-3) for implementation of the promotion order. Thereafter, vide office memorandum dated 01.1

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