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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3669

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Ranjit More, Chairman, Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A)
S. Rakesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A. No.539 of 2023|OA No.278 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Sweena Nair, Shri K.K. Rai, Ms. Yogita
For the Respondents: Shri R.K. Jain, Mr. Harish Saini, Sh.Hanu Bhaskar

Seniority depression for delayed joining on own request upheld per rules; claims barred by delay, non-joinder; no parity with dissimilar cases; statutory rules govern over equity claims.

Headnote:(A) Indian Forest Service (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1997 - Rule 3(3)(i) proviso - Indian Forest Service (Probation) Rules, 1968 - Rule 6(1), Rule 8(1) - All India Services (Condition of Service - Residuary Matters) Rules, 1960 - Rule 3 - Seniority fixation - Direct recruit officer permitted to join probationary training with subsequent year's batch on own request for extension to appear in another competitive exam - Seniority depressed by one year as per rules - Claim for re-fixation after 11 years barred by delay and laches - Affected officers must be impleaded when challenging seniority lists - No parity with officers whose joining delayed due to medical re-examination or later rule amendments - Principles of equality apply only to similarly situated persons - Acquiescence to extension with known condition bars later challenge. (Paras 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16)

(B) Limitation and Laches - Service claims - Stale claims cannot be revived by representations after long delay - Direction to consider representation does not extend limitation or create fresh cause of action. (Paras 11, 11.1)

(C) Natural Justice - Seniority disputes - Non-joinder of necessary parties whose rights affected renders petition defective - Affected officers entitled to hearing before alteration of lists. (Paras 12, 12.1)

Facts of the case:
Applicant qualified IFS exam 2001, offered appointment 2002 but sought extension to appear in Civil Services Mains 2002 - Ministry granted one-year extension, explicitly depressing seniority by one year - Joined with next batch, allotment fixed as 2003 - Representations rejected; challenged seniority lists after years including AGMUT cadre list - OAs filed seeking re-fixation to 2002 batch.

Findings of Court:
Seniority fixation as 2003 strictly per rules; no discrimination as situations distinct; claim stale, non-joinder fatal; OAs dismissed.

Issues: (i) Barred by delay/laches for not challenging 2002 order timely? (ii) Dismissal for non-joinder of affected parties? (iii) Entitled to 2002 allotment? (iv) Arbitrary/discriminatory refusal of short extension?

Ratio Decidendi: Seniority follows statutory rules; voluntary extension request with explicit seniority consequence binds applicant; parity denied for dissimilar facts; long delay bars relief; necessary parties essential in seniority challenges.

Result: Original Applications dismissed.

Table of Content
1. joint disposal of identical oas. (Para 1 , 2)
2. factual timeline of appointment and seniority dispute. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 9)
3. applicant's claims of erroneous seniority and discrimination. (Para 6)
4. respondents defend seniority under ifs rules. (Para 7 , 8)
5. claim barred by delay and laches. (Para 10 , 11)
6. non-joinder of necessary parties fatal. (Para 12)
7. seniority fixed per ifs seniority rules 1997. (Para 13)
8. no discrimination; cases not similarly situated. (Para 14)
9. preet pal singh distinguishable on facts. (Para 15)
10. oas dismissed on limitation and merits. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)

ORDER 

Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A):

Since the issues involved in the present Original Applications are identical and arise out of a common set of facts, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, both the O.As. are taken up together and disposed of by way of this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity in the narration of facts and adjudication of the issues involved, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, O.A. No. 539/2023 is treated as the lead case and the facts therein are being referred to for the purpose of this common order.

2. By filing O.A. No. 539 of 2023 under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant is seeking the following reliefs:

"i. Direct the respondents to consider the case of applicant for refixing his AGMUT inter se seniority to 2002 Batch considering that similarly circumstances officers were granted exemption from attending the foundational course in the year 2002 as the exemption was granted to a trainee officer of 2007 batch and as such be further pleased to hold and declare that the Applicant was entitled for fixation of his seniority in the year 2002, when the Applicant was appointed to Indian Forest Service.

ii. This Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to quash and set aside the seniority list published on 06.07.2022,qua the Applicant and thereby direct the Respondents to refix the seniority of the Applicant to the year 2002, when the Applicant was allotted to Indian Forest Service and thereby grant the Applicant all other consequential benefits in terms of salary, promotion, upgradation of pay-scale etc.

iii. Direct the respondents to decide the representation of applicant; and iv. pass any other order which this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

2.1 By filing O.A. No. 354/2018 before the Jodhpur Bench of this Tribunal, which was transferred to this Principal Bench of this Tribunal and numbered as O.A. No. 278/2024, the applicant has sought the following reliefs:-

"(i) by an appropriate order or direction, the impugned order dated 09.09.2018 passed by the Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change whereby the representation of the applicant for re-fixation of inter-Se- Seniority has been rejected illegally and arbitrarily (Annexure-A/1), may kindly be declared illegal and same may kindly be quashed and set aside and;

(ii) By an appropriate order or direction, the Inter-Se-Seniority of the applicant may kindly be re-fixed to the batch of 2002 instead of 2003 and consequently he may be allowed all the subsequent benefits as per his re-fixed Seniority in accordance with law.

(iii) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the applicant.

(iv) That the costs of this application may be awarded to the applicant."

FACTS OF THE CASE (O.A. No. 539/2023)

3. Facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, are that in July 2001, the UPSC invited applications for the Indian Forest Service Examination, 2001 for appointment to the Indian Forest Service against a total of 33 Vacancies. The applicant appeared and qualified the said Examination, as is evident from Indian Forest Service Final Result, 2001 (Annexure A-2). Subsequently, the appl

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 Back to top