Back
M. S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, SUKHVINDER KAUR
Jagbir Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. M.S. Ramachandra Rao, J.
Since common issues of law and fact arise in this batch of cases, they are being disposed off by this common order.
2. We are concerned in these cases with the legality and validity of absorption of Sh.PradeepAtri, Sh. Praveen Chaudhary,Sh.Pankaj Gaur and Sh.Arun Bhatia(for short 'private respondents') [originally appointed as Sub Divisional Engineers/ Asst.Engineers (Civil) in the Haryana Rural and Panchayat Raj Department [for short 'the PR Department']] into the Haryana Public Works (Building and Roads) Department [for short 'the PWD (B&R) Department'] and grant of seniority to them above certain direct recruits.
| Name | Date of appointment in the PR dept. as SubDivisional Engineer/Asst Engineer | Date of deputation to PWD (B&R) dept. as SubDivisional Engineer/Asst Engineer | Date of absorption in PWD (B&R) dept. as Sub Divisional Engineer/Asst Engineer | Date from which seniority was given to them in the cadre of Asst.Engineer | Date on which such seniority was conferred on them |
| Pradeep Atri | 6.12.2004 | 16.11.2005 | 6.10.2006 | 6.10.2006 | 2.7.2010 |
| Prave | |||||
Seniority in service is a statutory right determined by established merit lists, with waiting list candidates lacking rights to precedence over those appointed from the main list.
Service matter - Seniority - The seniority cannot be reckoned from the date of occurrence of the vacancy and cannot be given retrospectively unless it is so expressly provided by the relevant service....
Vested rights of promoted employees cannot be impaired by subsequent administrative actions, preserving seniority acquired under prior rules.
The court upheld that seniority must be determined based on recruitment batch and performance in training, emphasizing timely challenges to promotions are essential to maintain stability in service r....
Merit-based seniority must prevail in public service appointments despite procedural delays, ensuring fair treatment and equal opportunities as mandated by service regulations.
The court reaffirmed that temporary or ad-hoc promotions do not confer seniority rights, emphasizing strict adherence to statutory rules for public service appointments.
The court ruled that individuals denied appointments due to administrative errors retain entitlement to benefits and seniority on par with their counterparts, affirming parity despite delayed appoint....
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.
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
