Back
ANIL KSHETARPAL
Nardeep Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
Anil Kshetarpal, J. (Oral) - Primarily, the petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the final seniority list of the Audit Officers issued on 14.11.2022. The petitioner and the private respondents are working in the Department of Cooperation, Punjab. The petitioner, being physically handicapped, got accelerated promotion on 01.09.2016 as Audit Officer, whereas, the private respondents were directly recruited on 28.02.2017 & 04.12.2017 as Audit Officers. In my opinion, the following issue requires adjudication:-
'If the direct recruits are appointed subsequent to the date of accelerated promotion of the junior reserved category promotees but prior to the date of promotion of senior general category promotees, at the post Audit Officer, then, while applying the catch-up rule in determining the seniority among the promotees of two different categories and the direct recruits, what is the correct method of working out the seniority?"
2. The petitioner was appointed under the physically handicapped quota as Audit Inspector on 03.1
The catch-up rule in determining seniority among different categories of employees should be applied in a manner that balances the interests of all categories and does not result in reverse discrimin....
Seniority assigned to any employee could not be changed after a lapse of 7 years, though even on merit it was found that seniority of the petitioner therein had correctly been fixed.
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 consequ....
Seniority for government employees must be determined from the date of appointment, not the initiation of recruitment, as upheld in relevant Supreme Court decisions.
Law cannot come to the rescue of the official respondents in having extended a benefit in favour of certain employees in disregard of rules and the law on the subject. The Court cannot be a signatory....
Seniority – Date of entry in a particular service or date of substantive appointment is the safest criterion for fixing seniority inter se between one officer or other or between one group of officer....
The court reaffirmed that temporary or ad-hoc promotions do not confer seniority rights, emphasizing strict adherence to statutory rules for public service appointments.
Service Laws – Seniority List – OMs made it clear that seniority of direct recruits had to be fixed from the date of appointment and not from date of initiation of recruitment process.
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
