SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Megh) 33

H. S. THANGKHIEW
Arun Kumar Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: M. Chanda, M.L. Nongpiur.
For the Respondent: R. Debnath.

Table of Content
1. seniority determination based on cadre hierarchy. (Para 1 , 2)
2. claim for seniority despite administrative rejections. (Para 3 , 4)
3. entitlement to seniority must adhere to the established rules. (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 11)
4. importance of stability in seniority lists over time. (Para 7 , 12)
5. dismissal of writ petition based on established seniority and rules. (Para 10 , 13)

JUDGMENT :

H.S. THANGKHIEW, J.

1. The issue in the present writ petition concerns the inter se seniority of the petitioner vis-a-vis the respondents No. 7 and 8, in the cadre of Warrant Officer (Personal Assistant) following their re-mustering in the said cadre w.e.f. 19.02.2008. While the two private respondents were re-mustered from the cadre of Havildar/Clerk, the petitioner was re-mustered from the cadre of Rifleman/Operator Radio and Line (ORL), which was a cadre lower in hierarchy than that of the Havildar cadre. As such, at that point of time, the two private respondents were assigned higher seniority than the petitioner in the cadre of Warrant Officer (PA), which was as per Paragraph –

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
    whatsapp-icon Back to top