Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
MR. JUSTICE PUNEET GUPTA, J
Inder Singh Slathia S/o Shri Ganpat Singh Slathia – Appellant
Versus
State through, Commissioner/Secretary to Govt., Housing and Urban Development Department, Civil Sectt. Jammu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Khilafwarzi Inspector on 29.04.1991 in the pay scale of Rs.950-1500/- and is still in the same grade. The respondent No.4 entered the service as Khilafwarzi Inspector on 02.06.1992 in the grade of Rs.950-1500/-, however he is getting his salary in the grade of Rs.6500-10500/- with effect from 2003. The seniority list which was tentative one was issued wherein the petitioner figured at Serial No.4 and the respondent No.4 figured at Serial No.6. The petitioner was required to be upgraded in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000/- prior to the up-gradation of respondent No.4. The respondent No.4 was transferred as Secretary to Notified Area, Vijaypur vide Order No. 185-DLBJ of 2002 dated 18.06.2002 in the grade of Rs.5000-8000/-. The petitioner aggrieved by this order made a representation before the respondents; however, no reply was given to the said representation. The aforesaid order dated 18.06.2002 is challenged on the ground that the same is discriminatory qua the petitioner as the petitioner is senior to the respondent No.4 as Khilafwarzi Inspector and, therefore, was required to be upgraded in the grade of Rs.5000-80
Tentative seniority lists do not confer rights; unchallenged promotions of a respondent negate claims for parity in pay scales.
The entitlement to seniority in the Seniority List of Inspectors Grade-I is determined by the relevant Recruitment and Promotion Rules, the 85th Amendment to the Constitution of India, and the catch-....
Once an incumbent is appointed to a post according to rule, his seniority has to be counted from the date of his appointment and not according to the date of his confirmation.
The Validation Act stipulates that service duration from adhoc appointments cannot influence seniority, confirming the petitioner’s senior status over the respondent.
The court established that seniority must be determined by the date of first appointment, and settled seniority cannot be revised after a significant delay.
The promotion of an employee without prior notice or hearing violates principles of natural justice, rendering such actions void and unenforceable.
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
