Back
MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI
Tseten Palzor Bhutia – Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. - (i). The Petitioner, an Additional Superintendent of Police was initially appointed in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, in the Police Department, Government of Sikkim by a letter of appointment dated 09-11-2015. He assails the offer of appointment made to the Respondent No.4 (hereinafter 'R4'), dated 10-05-2016 (Annexure-P7), and the appointment Order, dated 25-06-2016, appointing R4 as Deputy Superintendent of Police and prays that both be set aside. That, the inter se seniority settled vide Notification bearing No.106/GEN/DOP, dated 02-08-2016, whereby R4 has been placed at Serial no.69 while he has been placed at Serial no.70 also be set aside and he be placed at Serial no.69 of the seniority list. That, the Respondents be directed to make necessary corrections in the Office Order, dated 03-09-2019, (vide which he and R4 were promoted to the post of Additional Superintendent of Police), by placing him at Serial no.1 instead of R4. That, the Respondents be ordered to refrain from taking steps on the Order dated 03-09-2019 and a fresh seniority list be published with the rectifications sought supra.
(ii) The Petitioner's case summarized
Inter se seniority must be determined by merit according to recruitment rules, rather than the date of appointment, reinforcing principles of legal validity in public appointments.
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.
Candidates wrongfully excluded from appointments are entitled to notional seniority from the date they should have been appointed, correcting delays caused by administrative latches.
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.
Seniority in public service must be determined by the date of first appointment, not by roster points, as per statutory rules.
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
