Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.SUBRAMANIAN, G. ARUL MURUGAN, JJ
K.Muthu – Appellant
Versus
Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary to Government – Respondent
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
2. The appellants took part in the selection for the post of Sub Inspector (Technical), which was introduced in the year 1999 and Adhoc Rules for the appointments were made on 18.01.1999 under G.O.Ms. No.53. The selection process began with a notification issued by the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Service Recruitment Board (TNUSRB) for the year 1999-2000. All the appellants took part in the said selection and they were successful in the written examination and the interview. Thereafter, they were referred to medical examination.
3. As far as the three appellants viz. the appellants in Writ Appeal Nos.2172, 2176 and 2181 of 2024, they were not immediately appointed as they di
Seniority of Sub Inspectors (Technical) must be determined by examination marks post-training, not by appointment dates, and delays not caused by candidates should not affect their seniority.
The court established that supplementary examination marks must be included in seniority calculations for candidates who completed their training within the prescribed period.
The petitioners were entitled to the benefit of FR 22-B, and the respondent authorities were directed to re-fix the scale of pay of the petitioners by giving them the benefit of FR 22-B.
Amendments favoring in-service candidates in seniority over direct recruits violated constitutional equality, necessitating merit-based revisions.
Merit-based seniority must prevail in public service appointments despite procedural delays, ensuring fair treatment and equal opportunities as mandated by service regulations.
Candidates wrongfully excluded from appointments are entitled to notional seniority from the date they should have been appointed, correcting delays caused by administrative latches.
.
Employees selected under the same process maintain seniority regardless of appointment delays, and delays not attributable to them cannot deprive them of benefits.
Seniority for government employees must be determined from the date of appointment, not the initiation of recruitment, as upheld in relevant Supreme Court decisions.
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
