Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 10191
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
SH. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J), MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, MEMBER(A)
Rahul Kumar, Ranjeet Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Employees' State Insurance Corporation – Respondent
OA No. 063/83/2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sh. Barjesh Mittal
For the Respondents: Sh. K.K. Thakur
Seniority in administrative postings cannot be claimed prior to actual promotion date, upheld against earlier wrongful promotions.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Promotion and seniority - Challenge to the seniority list of Assistants whereby juniors promoted through LDCE were placed above the applicants, who were promoted earlier under the DPC quota - Supreme Court ruling in K. Meghachandra Singh case holds that seniority cannot be claimed from a date prior to actual entry into service - The applicants were wrongfully debarred from LDCE and thus juniors cannot claim seniority over them. (Paras 15, 33, 36-38)
(B) The recruitment policy led to their improper placement in the seniority list owing to directives that restricted their participation in LDCE. (Paras 10, 34)
(C) The court found the impugned seniority list unsustainable and quashed it, directing recasting of seniority. (Paras 37, 39)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. foundation of the application citing issues with seniority and promotion. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. regulatory framework for promotions and their implications on seniority. (Para 4 , 5 , 15) |
| 3. court's review emphasizing the importance of correct seniority based on actual promotion dates. (Para 10 , 34 , 38) |
ORDER
Per: SH. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR MEMBER (J):
1. The present Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985 seeking the following relief(s):-
(i) That the impugned seniority list of cadre of Assistant/Head Clerk circulated vide order dated 24.09.2020 (Annexure A-1) be quashed and set aside and invalidated to the extent of placing the names of the applicants below their juniors who had qualified LDCE examination held on 09.06.2018.
(ii) That appropriate direction in the nature of mandamus be issued to the respondents to correct the seniority list of cadre of Assistants by placing the names/seniority position of the applicants above the names/seniority position of their juniors who had been promoted subsequent on the basis of LDCE examination to the promotion of the applicants from the due date with all consequential benefits viz. consideration of their cases for further promotion to the cadre of Superintendent etc. in the interest of justice.
2. The facts as encapsulated in the Original Application are that both the applicants were duly selected and appointed to the post of UDC under the Regional Office, ESIC, Baddi (H.P.) and joined in August 2012 under respondent Nos. 3 and 4. The posting orders dated 21.08.2012/24.08.2012 are appended as Annexure A-2.
3. That after their joining, the office of respondent No.3 issued seniority lists of UDCs of Himachal Region as on 30.06.2015 and subsequently as on 31.07.2016 vide communication dated 24.08.2016. In the said list, the name of applicant No.1 Sh. Rahul Kumar figures at serial No.15 and the name of applicant No.2 Sh. Ranjeet Kumar at serial No.19 (Annexure A-3).
4. That the next promotional post from the cadre of UDC is that of Assistant, which is governed by the ESIC (Head Clerk/Assistant) Recruitment Regulations, 1997 effective from 01.03.1997 (Annexure A-4). As per the said regulations, 75% of posts are to be filled by promotion on seniority-cum-fitness and 25% through LDCE from amongst UDCs with three years’ regular service.
5. That applicant No.1 Sh. Rahul Kumar, being senior, was promoted as Assistant in PB-2 ₹9300–34,800 with GP ₹4200 under 75% quota vide Office Order No.8 dated 03.04.2017 and assumed charge on the same date (Annexure A-5).
6. That respondent No.2 thereafter issued letter dated 09.08.2017 regarding conduct of LDCE for various posts including Assistant for the vacancy years 2016–17 and 2017–18, directing Regional Directors to send lists of eligible candidates (Annexure A-6).
7. That pursuant to the said instructions, the office of respondent No.3 circulated the recruitment notice to all concerned through e-mail dated 18.08.2017 along with circular dated 17.08.2017 (Annexure A-7). In response, applicant No.2 Sh. Ranjeet Kumar submitted his application form dated 18.08.2017 for appearing in LDCE for Assistant for the vacancy year 2016–2017 (Annexure A-8). However, the application of applicant No.1 Sh. Rahul Kumar was not accepted on the ground that he was already promoted as Assistant on 03.04.2017 (Annexure A-5).
8. That applicant No.2 Sh. Ranjeet Kumar was thereafter promoted to the cadre of Assistant under 75% seniority quota vide Office Order No.34 dated 23.03.2018 on the recommendations of the DPC (Annexure A-9).
9. That respondent No.2 issued communication dated 13.04.2018 prescribing the schedule and scheme of LDCE for Assistants for 2016–17 and 2017–18, scheduling the examination for 26.05.2018 which was rescheduled to 09.06.2018. Subsequently, vide letter dated 02.05.2018, the crucial date of eligibility was shifted from 1st April to 1st January (Annexure A-10 colly).
10. That applicant No.2 did no
