Back
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA
Parvesh Tyagi – Appellant
Versus
Deen Bandhu Chhotu Ram University of Science and Technology – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Tribhuvan Dahiya, J. (Oral)
This petition has been filed seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the seniority list dated 26.03.2015 (Annexure P-3), and promotion order dated 21.04.2015 (Annexure P-5), vide which the petitioner was illegally ignored in violation of Rule 10(ii) of the Guru Jambeshwar University of Science and Technology, Hisar. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondent-University to re-fix the petitioner's seniority over and above that of respondents No.2 to 9 as per the Rules.
2. Briefly, facts of the case are, the respondent-University advertised 18 posts of Clerk-cum-Data Entry Operator (hereinafter referred to as 'Clerk-cum-DEO') vide advertisement No.24 of 2008, dated 23.10.2008 (Annexure P-1). Out of these, six posts were advertised for general category candidates.
2.1. After conducting written test, computer skill test and typing test, as per the criteria, the candidates were interviewed by the selection committee. The names of candidates selected for appointment were recommended in the order of merit category wise, vide select list dated 18.03.2010 (Annexure P-2/R-5); the petitioner's name was recommended at no.1 in the waitin
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.
Seniority in public service must follow the order of merit per category, prohibiting inter-category comparisons, and claims made after inordinate delay are unsustainable.
Inter se seniority of promotees from multiple feeding cadres in one selection is determined by substantive appointment dates in their feeding cadres, not promotion order dates, per Rule 7.
The court held that settled seniority cannot be disturbed after a long period, emphasizing the principle of res judicata and the limits of administrative power in altering promotion dates.
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....
Promotions must be made in accordance with the merit-cum-seniority list prepared as per Rule 3 of G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 26.01.2009, and ignoring seniority to promote juniors is a violation of the rule p....
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
