Seniority lists finalized under pre-overruling law (initiation of recruitment process and quota rotation) protected prospectively; ad hoc service does not confer seniority; repeated provisional lists by employer prevent limitation bar.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI O.A. No. 840/2023 Reserved on : 13.01.2026 Pronounced on : 05.02.2026 Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

Hon’ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A)

Bahadur Singh, Aged 52 years Son of Shri Ram Lal Working as Assistant Legislative Counsel in Ministry of Law & Justice, New Delhi Resident of H.No. 201, Block-40, Sec-1 Omicron Greater Noida, U.P.-201310.

... Applicant (By Advocate : Mr. Yogesh Sharma)

Versus

1. Union of India through The Secretary Ministry of Law & Justice (Legislative Department) Govt. of India, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.

2. The Under Secretary (Administration-I)

Ministry of Law & Justice (Legislative Department) Govt. of India, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.

3. Sh. Praveen Kumar Tiwari Working as Assistant Legislative Counsel Ministry of Law & Justice (Legislative Department) Govt. of India, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.

4. Sh. Chandra Shekhar Sharma Working as Assistant Legislative Counsel Ministry of Law & Justice (Legislative Department) Govt. of India, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.

.. Respondents (By Advocates: Mr. R.K. Jain for R-1 & 2, Mr. S.N. Tripathi with Mr.

K.K. Mishra for R-3 and Mr. R.V. Sinha for R-4)

ORDER Hon’ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A)

In the present Original Application (O.A.) filed under Section

19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has sought for the following reliefs:-

“(i) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order of quashing the seniority list dated 26.02.2019, 18.02.2020 and 17.10.2022 only in respect of the inter-se- seniority of applicant and private respondent and consequently, pass an order directing the official respondents to place the applicant above the private respondent on the basis of the date of joining to the post of Assistant Legislative Counsel with all consequential benefits.

(ii) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may further graciously be pleased to pass an order of quashing the impugned order dated 15.12.2022, dated 30.07.2018, dated 28.02.2019 by which the representation of the applicant against the impugned seniority list has been rejected.

(iii) Any other relief which the Hon’ble Tribunal deem fit and proper may also be granted to the applicants along with the costs of litigation. "

2. Brief facts of the case, as put forth by the learned counsel for the applicant, are that:

2.1 The applicant was initially appointed to the post of Assistant (Legal) on 17.06.2004 in the Legislative Department of Ministry of Law & Justice. He was promoted to the post of Superintendent (Legal) on 08.10.2012. The next promotional post is Assistant Legislative Counsel, for which the Superintendent (Legal) with 3 years regular service is eligible. The mode of recruitment for the said post is 50% by promotion and 50% by direct recruitment.

2.2 One vacancy of Assistant Legislative Counsel arose on 30.09.2015 due to retirement of one Sh. B.K. Bansal. The respondents instead of convening a regular DPC for filling up the said vacancy, promoted the applicant to the post of Assistant Legislative Counsel on ad hoc basis on 19.10.2015. Thereafter, the said vacancy was carried forward to the subsequent year.

2.3 A proposal for filling up 3 vacancies by way of promotion was submitted to the UPSC on 02/03.05.2016 and on the basis of the recommendation of the UPSC, the applicant was promoted on regular basis on 20.07.2016. Subsequently, a proposal for filling up 6 vacancies through direct recruitment was submitted to the UPSC on 20.10.2016 and after se