CAT Chandigarh Judgement

8/9/2019 CAT Chandigarh Judgement

1/18

I

\J

T-84

& 85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc.vs.

UOI

etc,

.

CENTML

DMINISTMTIVE

RIBUNAL,

CHANDIGARH

ENCH

Date

f

decision

25.08.2009

COMM

HON'BLE

MRS.

SHYAMA

OGRA,

UDICIAL

MEMBER

HON'BLE

MR,

KHUSHI

RAM,ADMINISTRATIVE

EMBER

(1) 'T.A.NO.84-HR-2009

(cwP No.4165OF2006)

1. Dewan

Chand

on

of

Sh.

Kewal

Ram,

presently

orking

as

Assistant

Director

NC),

office

of chief

Generar

anager

elecom,

SNL,

aryana

Circle, mbala

antt.

Tilak

Raj

son

of

late

sh. Jhaman

al,

presenUy

orking

s

SubDivisional

EngineerMobile

lg.),

Office f

General

anager

elecom

istrict,

harat

Sanchar

igam

imited,

mbala

antt.

Satish

umar

Gupta

on

of Late

Sh.

sat

pal

Gupta,

resenUy

orking

s

sub

Divisional

ngineer

Legal),

ffice

of

General

Manager

elecom

District,

SNL,

mbala

antt.

s.K.Gupta

on

of Late

shri B.R.Gupta,

resenfly

orking

as Assistant

General

anger

A)

(Lookafter),

ffice

of

chief

General

anager

elecom,

Bharat

anchar

igam

imited,

aryana

ircle,

mbara

antt.

Madan

al

Sharma

on

of

Sh.

Pishori

al

presently

orking

s Assistant

Director NC),

office

of chief General

Manager

elecom,

SNL,

Haryana

Circle, mbala antt.

2 .

3 .


2/18

\$,

il

{

'i

*1

T-84

&

B5-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc.vs.

UOI

etc.

6. Pawan

umar

Kaushik

on

of Late

sh.

Ram

sarup

Kaushik,

working

as

Assistant

irector LL),

office

of

chief

General

Telecom

LL),

office

f

chief

General

anager

elecom,

SNL,

Circle,

mbala

antt.

By

Mr.

R.K.Sharma,

dvocate.

Versus

Petitioners

1' Union f ndiahroughheSecretary,inistryfCommunication

Information

echnology,

epartment

f Telecommunication

,

4zL,

sanchar

hawan,

0

Ashoka

oad,

ew

Derhi-l10001.

2.

chairman-cum-Managing

irector,

harat

anchar

igam

imited,

Statesmen

ouse,

arakhamba

oad,

ew

Delhi.

3. senior eputy irectoreneralpersonnel),haratanchar igam

Limited,

tatesmen

ouse,

arakhamba

oad,

ew

Derhi.

By:

Mr.

V.K.Sharma,

dvocate.

4

.

K.K.Mewani,

DE

ffice

f

GMTD,

aridabad.

5

.

Rajesh

anta,

DE,

ffice

f

GlvlTD,

mbala.

6

.

J.C.

Lather,

DE

ffice

f

GMTD,

issar.

7

.

Archana

ua,

SDE

ffice

f

GMTD,

aridabad.

8 .

Davinder

alra,

D

AMC),

ffice

f

GGMT

R

Circle,

mbala.

9

.

Rajni

Banta,

DE

ffice

f

GMTD,

mbala.

L

0

. Anjali

Sethi,

SDE

ffice

f

GMTD,

isar.

presentl

Manage

Haryan

)

sw


3/18

3

J

T-84

&

85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc.

vs.

UOI

etc'

L L

.

C.B.

Davra,

DE

ffice

f

GMTD,

aridabad.

12 .

Rakesh

umar

Garg,

SDE

ffice

f

GMTD,

mbala.

13 .

Rajesh

upta,

DE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

isar.

l-4 . L.C.Saharan,

DE,

ffice

f GMTD,

isar.

1-5

Parveen

aini,

DE

Mobile)

ffice

f G.M.

Mobile)

mbala.

l-5 . Mahaveer

arsad,

DE,

ffice

f GMTD,

onepat.

l-7 .

Narender

umar,

DE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

aridabad.

18 . Ishwar

ingh,

DE,

ffice

f GMTD,

arnal.

l-

9 .

Krishan

umar,

DE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

isar.

2

O

Mukesh

umar, DE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

ohtak.

21 .

Rajesh

umar, DE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

isar.

22

.

Janak

Raj,

AD

Vig.)

office

f

CGMT,

mbala.

2

3

. Rajender

umar

Dhingra,

DE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

isar.

24 . lat inder

Sehgal,

DE,

ffice

f GMTD,

arnal.

25. Rajesh

umar,

DE,

ffice

f GMTD,

isar.

26.

Ajay

Bhargava,DE,

ffice

f GMTD,

ewari.

27.

Jitender

umar, DE,

ffice

f GMTD,

arnal.

28.

Rajpal ingh,

DE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

isar.

29,

Mohan

alGaur,

DE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

aridabad.

30.

Kamal

umar, DE,

ffice

f GMTD.

31.

Pardeep

umar,

DE,

ffice

f GMTD,

ind.

32.

Rajni

Nagpal,

DE,

ffice

of GMTD,

ohtak.

)


4/18

T-84

&

B5-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc.

vs.

UOI

tc.

33.

paramjit

Kaur,

SDE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

Gurgaon.

34. yashpaf,

SDE,

ffice

f

GMTD,

urgaon.

By

:

Mr,

Harish

inra,

dvocate.

q

Divisiona

office

of

Engineer

Ambala,

1.

2.

Respondents

(2)

r_8s_HR-200e

(CWp

No.13955

ot

2OO7)

Pawan

Kumar

Jindal

son

of

Gian

Chand

indal,

Sub

Engineer

Transmission

1),

Bharat

anchar

Nigam

Ltd.,

G.M.T.D,,

mbala,

aryana.

Vipin

Kumar

ain,

son

of

Sh,

M.C.

Jain,

Sub

Divisionaf

(PLG),

Bharat

Sanchar

Nigam

Ltd.

Office

of

G.M.T.D.

Haryana.

3,

4.

Ashok

umar

on

of

Sh.

Hans

Raj

Sharma,

.D.

p.L.G),

harat

sanchar

igam

td.

ffice

f

G.M.

r,4.S)

mbara

aryana.

Rakesh

umar

Kalra

on

of

Sh.

Nihat,

Chand,

ub

Divisional

Engineer'

harat

anchar

igam

td.,

ffice

f

G.M.T.D.,

mbara,

Haryana.

Anil

Kumar

on

of

Sh,

Ram

Lal,

Sub

Divisional

ngineer

O/D),

Bharat

anchar

igam

td.,

ffice

f

G.M.T.D.,

mbala,

aryana.

Mahesh

umar

harma

on

of

sh.

Jai.,Krishan

af,

sub

Divisionaf

Engineer

OCB-Local),

Bharat

Sa

nchar

\gam

Ltd.,

office

of

G.M.T.D.,mbala,aryana. I

-J'

5.

6.


5/18

)

5

T-84

&

85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc'

vs'

UOI

etc'

T.DavinderSinghNegisonofLateSh.Daya|ChandNegiSub

Divisional

ngineer

MKTG),

harat

Sanchar

Nigam

Ltd',

office

of

G.M.T.D.,

mbala

aryana'

B.

Dinesh

Puri,

son

of

sh.

Mohinder

it

Lal

Puri,

sub

Divisional

Engineer

Admn.),

harat

anchar

igam

td.,

office

f

G.M.T.D',

Ambala

aryana.

g.

Brij

Kishore,

onof Latesh. Ramchand, ub Divisionalngineer

(Vig) ,BharatSancharNigamLtd ' ,Of f iceofG'M'T 'D' 'Ambala '

Haryana.

10.

BhuPinder

ingh

on

of

General

manager

MS),

Haryana.

,11.

Prem

sagar

sekri

son

of

Late

sh.

Parma

Nand

sekhri,

Sub

Div is iona|Engineer(o/D),BharatSancharNigamLtd.,of f

G.M.T,D.,

mbala,

aryana'

t2.PraveenKumarsonofSh.NandKishor,AD(oPN),BharatS

Nigamtd.,Office fG.M'M'S), mbala,

aryana'

By

Mr.

Yogesh

oel,

dvocate'

Versus

1.

Union

f

India

hrough

he

Secretary'

Information echnology,

epaftment

Sanchar

hawan,

0,

Ashoka

oad,

ew

Sh.

Assa

Singh,

A.D.(M.M),

ffice

of

Bharat

Sanchar

Nigam

Ltd.,

Ambala,

Ministry

f

Communications

nd

of

Telecommunications,

2I,

Delh i-110001.

)

i

1

I


6/18

lst

r,$

$i

11

T

-.{-

T-84

&

85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc.

vs.

UOI

etc.

2.

Bharat

anchar

igam

imited,

tatesmen

ouse,

48,

Barakhamba

oa

New

Derhi,

hrough

tschairman-cum-Managingirector

3.

chief

Generar

anager,

aryana

erecom

ircre,

harat

anchar

iga

Limited,

07,

he

Mall,

mbala

antt,

aryana.

Respondents

By

:

Mr.

V.K.Sharma,

dvocate.

ORDER(Orat)

are

common

s

such

both

he

petition

have

een

aken

p

or

disposal

y

this

common

rder.

2'

The

applicants,

orking

s

sub

Divisional

ngineers

nder

he

officia

respondents,

re

members

f

Telecom

ngineering

eryices

Group

8,.

The

question

aised

n

these

pplications

s

as

o

what

would

e

he

mode

f

fixation

of

seniority

n

TES

Group

B'

between

members

f

service

who

are

appointe

on

the

basis

f

seniority

is-i-vis

hose

who

enter

he

service

fter

qualifying

the

Limited

epartmental

ompetitive

xamination

for

short

LDCE),

f

the

rules

are

silent

n

his

aspect?

3' Therecruitment

o

the

post

of

sub

Divisional

ngineer

Telecom)

s

governed

y

sub

Divisionar

ngineer

Terecom)

ecruitment

ures,

002.

The

post

s

o

be

illed

n

by

promotion

o

the

extent

f

75o/oon

he

basis

f

seniority-

cum-fitness'

unior

elecom

fficers

Telecom)

ith

3

years

egular

eruice

n

the

grade

are

eligible

or

prqmotion

n

seniority-cum-fitness

basis.

Rest

25%

quotas o be illed n nelbasisf LDCE,rom

amongst

unior

elecom

fficers.

MRS.

SHYAMA

DOGM,

JM

The

questions

f

facts

and

law

I


7/18


8/18

/

g

s

.J

&

,

T-84& B5-HR-2009ewan

hand tc.

vs.

UOIetc.

t5.7.2007and obviously fter results

are out the incumbents

ould

get

appointment gainst25olo

Quota

and they may

get

seniority

ver and

above

.

persons

ho have

already

ecome

members

f

the

seruice

ike

applicants.

n

fact

in the

seniority

ist dated

3.4.2007, lots

have

been

kept

vacant

or incumbents

who

are

yet

to

be

promoted

y LDCE.

7. Learned

ounsel

or

the applicants

ubmitted

hat

once

no

Rota

has

been

provided

y the rules,

he

same annot

e read

nto

he rules

and

seniority

cannotbe fixedas per roster.Therebeingno provisionn the rules or fixation

of

seniority

s

per

slots n

the ratio

of

3:1, he

seniority

as

o

be fixed

as

per

date

of

joining

on the

basis

of continuous

ength

of service.

t

has

been

submitted

hat

official

espondents

annot

grant promotion/senior ity

o

the

incumbents

elonging

o LDCE

uota

rom

a date when

they

were

not

even

members f service.

B. It is

submitted

hat

as

per

nstructions

ated

25.6.1986

Annexure

-

10 n

TA No.B5-HR-09)

f

adequateumber

f direct

ecruits

renot

available

n

any

particular

ear,

he

promotees

ill

be

bunched

ogether

t

the

bottom

f

the

seniority

ist

below he last

position

p to which

t is

possible

o

determine

seniority

n the basisof rotationof quota.The unfilleddirect recruits uota

vacancies

ould

be carried

orward

and the

additional

irect ecruits

elected

against

he carried

orward

acancies

f

the

previous

ear

would

be

placed

n-

block

elow

he ast

of

p

the

basis

f

rotation

f the vacancies

f

the

6n"' \

6f

this

principie,

t

is

argued

hat

promotion

y

selection

aid

ear.

On he

qr


9/18

,

q

T-84

&

85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc.

s.

UOI

tc.

on

the

basis

f LDCE

s

akin

o

direct

ecruitment

nd

same

principle

ill

ollow

n

such

cases

lso.

9'

It

is

argued

by

learned

ounsel

or

the

applicants

n

the

basis

of

judgment

n

Ravlnderan

&

others,

1995

supp,

4)

scc

654,

hat

in

case

persons

re

promoted

y

virtue

f

seniority

um

itness

nd

others

y

LDCE

gainst

5o/o

nd

25%

respectivery,

hen

promotion

o

next

higher

ost

s

to

be

made

irst

by

satisfying

he

750lo

uota

f

those

ntitled

o

promotion

y

viftue

of

seniority-

cum-fitness

nd

only

hen

25o/o

uota

s

to

be

illed

n.

t

is

further

rgued

hat

even

on

the

principles

aid

down

n

,

AIR

1983

SC1384,

he

appricants

ave

o

be

herd

o

have

een

ppointed

gainst

vacancies

elonging

o

earlier

hereby

ntitling

hem

seniority

ver

and

above

privateespondentssRules

f 2002

would

ot

be

appricable

o

them,

10'

Per

ontra,

earned

ounsel

or

he

respondents

as

placed

eliance

on

the

decision

f

Apex

Court

n

&

Kashmir'

2000

3)

scr,

34,

o

claim

hat

seniority

s

available

rom

he

date

vacancy

ecomes

vailable

n

a

particular

uota.

Quota

ule

annot

e

presumed

to have beenbrokenmererybecause f

the

rapse

on

the

part

of

the

government

/

authorities

n

not

aking

ppropriate

teps

o

fiil

up

the posts

n

accordance

ith

he

quota

ule.

11.

The private

espondents

ave

arso

contested

he

case

of

the

applicants

n

he

grounds

hat

hese

ppointments

nd

promotions

re

made

n

1010 andidateshoare ikeryo beaffected

ave

ot


10/18

p

fo

T-84

&

85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc.vs.

UOI

etc.

been

made

arty.

No

publication

as

effected

or

heir

seruice.

hus,

he

case

s

bad

or

non-joinder

f

necessary

arties.

hey

urther

ontendedhatseniority

'

position

f

thesepersons

as

attained

inality

nd

nobody

as

challenged

t.

Therefore,

f

there

rea

s

ailowed,

t

wourd

ust

open

pandora,s

ox

and

wourd

unsettle

he

position

lready

ettled

ong

ime

back.

t

is

also

heir

contention

that

hey

have

come

hrough

election

n

merit

basis

nder

25olo

uota.

he

applicants

ould

have

pafticipated

n

that

selection

rocess

lso

but

hey

have

chosen

ot

to

participate,

herefore,

hey

cannot

hallenge

t

at

this

belated

stage.

12.

we

have

heard

earned

ounser

or

the

pafties

nd

perused

he

material

n

he

ile

minutely.

13'

on

a

careful

onsideration

f

the

matter

nd

egal roposition

f law

cited nbehalf f contestingarties

e

ind

hat

n

the

Recruitment

ules,

002,

there

s

a

specific

rovision

hat

n

case

f

non-availability

f

sufficient

umber

f

officers

or

illing

p

such osts

y

promotion,

n-filled

acancies

an

be

diverted

and

illed

hrough

DCE

r

vice

versa

nd

hat

the

quota

hall

be

restored

n

subsequent

ecruitment

ears.

14' First f allwewilldealwith hePreliminary

bjection

f

respondents

that

all

he

persons

ho

are

ikely

o,be

gffected,

f

claim

f

applicants

s

to

be

allowed,

re

not

party

n

the

proceedings

nd

a

such

he

petitions

are

not

mainta inab le . Inthecaseofnumberofpersons

belonging

o

LDCE uota

such heycandefend he

have

been

mpleaded

interest f the other

as

a

party-respondents

and

as

personslso.n

our

view

hey


11/18

I

U

T-84& 85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc.

vs.

UOIetc.

have eft

no

stone

un-turned

n discharging

heir

duty

to

defend

he

petitions.

Thus,

he

objectionaken

by

the respondents

s rejected.

esides

his,

notice

s

found

o have

been

given

n various

ewspapers

f Indian

Express

New

ndian

Express

ublished

rom

different

laces

.e.

Mumbai,

adodra,

handigarh,

une,

Ahmedabad,

elhl,

olkata,

ucknow,

hennai,

oimbatore;

adurai,

angalore;

Belgaum;

hiruvananthpuram;

isakhapatnam;

ijaywada;

hubneshwar,

ide

AnnexureA-1

to A-17 with

additional

ffidavit

dated t21912006

ield

by

Shri

Diwan

Chand,

pplicant

o.1.

15.

The most

important

act

which

needs

o

be noticed

here

is that

applicants

ere

promoted

gainst

eniority-cm-fitness

uota

vide

order

dated

16.9.2004

Annexure

-2),

whereas

509

persons

elonging

o LDCE

were

promoted vide order dated 26.5.2004 Annexurep-6). Apparenily, he

incumbents

ppointedhrough

LDCE

ave

been

given

eniority

n the

basis

f

slotsmean

or

particular

ears

anging

rom 1996

tgg7,

1997-98;

999-2000;

2000-2001

tc. t is

specific

lea

of the

applicants

n

the

basis

f Annexure

-3,

a

statement

howing

hat

posts

under75olo

uota

f seniority-cum-fitness

ere

availableor promotion,hat they werepromotedwithin heir own quotaand

after exhausting

5olo

uota,

ction o fill

up remaining

uota

of

25o/o

ould

be

taken

by department,

his

plea

f availability

f

posts

within

heir

own

quota

as

been taken

n

para

6 of the

petition.

he

official

espondent

ave

admitted

he

same o

be

"matter

of

record"

herebynot

disputing

the

stand

aken

by the

appl icants.

I

/i'

.

trj.:

i :


12/18

lv

T-84

& 85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc.

vs.

UOI

etc.

16.

Now

et

us

discuss

he

various

udgments

elied

pon

n behalf

f

the

applicants.

n

N.K.

Chauhan

s.

State

of

Gujarat

1997

1)

SCC 08;

he

.

words

as

ar as

practicable"

n

quota

ule,

havebeen

nterpreted.

t hasbeen

held hat

such

erm mean,

ot

nterferring

ith he

rational hich

ulfills he

interest f

administration,

ut

lexible

rovision

lothing

overnment

ith

powers

to

meet

special

ituations

here

he normal

process

f

the

government

resolution

annot

lowsmooth.

t

is a

matter f accent

nd

mpoft

which

ffords

the

inal est

n

the

choice

etween

he

wo

parallel

nterpretation.

heState,n

rune

with he

mandatef

th

rule,

must

make erious

ffoft o secure

ands

o

fill

the

number f

vacancies

rom

he open

market.

f it

does

notsucceed,espite

honest

nd

serious

ffoft,

t

qualifies

or

departure

rom he rule.

As far as

possible,

he

quota

ystem

ustbe

kept

up

and,

f not

practicable,

romotees

n

the'place f direct ecruits r direct ecruitsn the place f promoteesaybe

inducted

pplying

he regular

rocedure,

ithout uffering

he seats o

lie

indefinitely

acant.

n

B.S.Yadav

s.Stateof

Haryana,

IR

1981

C

561, t

hasbeen

eld

hat

rule

of

rotacannot

e

read

nto he ruleof

quota rescribed

by

rule

B of

the

Punjab uperior

udicial

eruice

ules. n Suraj

Parkash

t

Gupta& OthersVs. Stateof J&K& Others,2000 4)SLR, 86, t hasbeen

held

hat

since

n the

Recrujtment

uleshere

s

only

a

quota

uleand hat

no

rota

ulehasbeen

xpr:essfy

rescri\ed,

ota

cannot e brought

n because

f

t l

past

practice

nd

tnur\ry

no

rota coupled

with

quota

but

that

there s

only

a

quota

ule.

t washeld

natttne

can

claim

eniority

nly

f he

has

beenappointed

in hisownquota


13/18

1e

T-84

&

85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc'

vs'

UOI

etc'

16.InA.JanardhanVs.UnionofIndia,AIRlg83ScT69ithasbee

hetd that where the rule provides or recruitment rom two sources

and

.simu|taneously

rescribes

uota,unless

here

s

power

o

relax

he

rule,

any

recruitment

n

excess

f

quota rom

either

of

the

sources

ould

be

illegal

nd

the

excess

ecruits

unless

hey

find

their

place

by

adjustment

n

subsequent

years

n

the

quota,would

not

be

members

f

the

seruice'

f

the

power s

conferred n

government

o

make

ecruitment

n

relaxation

f

the

rules,

any

recruitment

made

contrary

o

quota ure

word

not

be

invafid

nress

t

is

shown

that

he

powerof

relaxation

as

exercised

alafide'

t7.

In

H.v.

pardasani

s.

union

of

India,

AIR

1985

c

781

t

has

been

held

hat

n

the

absence

f

any

special

rovision

egulating

etermination

seniority,

ength

f

continuous

enuice

n

any

pafticular

rade ould

e

hebasis

for

dQtermining

eniority

n

that

grade'

he

compulsion

f

the

rule

goes

o

the

extremeextentofmakinggovernmentkeepthevacanciesinthequ

direct

ecruits

pen

nd

o

meet

he

urgent

eeds

f

administration

y

creating

ex-cadre

osts

or

making

d-hoc

ppointment'

owever,

f

a

rule

prescribes

method

f

fixation

f

inter-se

eniority,

he

normal

ractice ould

ot

apply

nd

the

rule

hall

revail,

bviously

ubject

o

its

constitutionality'

18.

Ravindran

&

others,

1995

8)

SLR,

Page

27,

he

question as

about

ixation

of

seniority

f

those

romoted

o

the

next

higher

ost

quota

f

75o/o

nd

25%

promoted

y

virtue

of


nd

hose

UV

irtueifof

having

assed

prescribedxaminationespectively't

q{


14/18

tL

T-84

&

85-HR-2009

ewan

hand

tc'

vs'

UOI

etc'

was

held

hat

both

ategories

ave

o

be

reated

s

belonging

o

one

single

lass

of promoteesndpromotion,s o bemade y irstsatisfyinghe750louota f

those

ntitled

y


ule

and

hen

he

25olo

f

those

entitled

bypassingexaminat iontobeplacedbelowthesaidT5o/o.

19.

Balwan

&

others,

2009

2)

SCT,

Page

94,

it

was

held

hat

direct

ecruits

cannot laim eniorityrom hedateprioro theirappointments

hen

hey

were

not

even

borne

n

the

cadre

service.

rea

hat

he

direct

ecruits

re

entitled

o

seniority

rom

he

date

he

post

ell

vacant

n the

quota

or

direct

ppointments'

was

rejected.

n

2008

11)

page

173,

t

was

held

hat

f

inter-se

eniority

s

finally

ecided

y

. app|yinghe principle f continuous

ength

f

service,

t

may

bring

an

end

o

l i t igat ion.betweentheof f icersof twogroups'Therefore ' thepr inc ip leof

,'continuous

length

of

service"

hould

be

applied

or

determined

he

inter-se

seniority

f

the

officers

f

Delhi

Higher

udicial

ervice

ppointed

p

o

the

year

2006.

In

case

of

officers

appointed

on

the

same

date'

whether

direct

)

appointment

rom

two

different

sdurces

on

the

same

date

(

emphasis

supplied).

20.

In

India

&

Others,

2008

2)

SCT,

Page

8,

it

was

held

hat

direct

ecruits

ould


15/18

q

T-84

& 85-HR-2009

ewan hand

tc.

vs. UOI

etc,

not claim

appointment

rom he date

of

vacancyn their

quota

before heir

selection.he respondentsavealsoplacedeliance n ceftainudgmentso

claim

hat ota

quota

ule

anbe

ollowedor

determinationf seniority.

2L,

Thesum otalof

the

above iscussed

udgments

s

that

f there s

quota rovided

n

the

rules or recruitment

o by different ethods

o

posts

.e.

by wayof

promotion

n seniority-cum-fitnessasis ndrecruitment

y way

of

promotion

houghLimited epartmentalxamination

r for

that

matter

irec

recruitment,n

a

particular

roportion

r

quota

whichn

thiscase appens

o

be

75:25,

and ecruitmentakes

n

a single

rocess,

hen

t is

practical,

ossib

and

permissible

o follow

he

rule

of

rotation

f

vacancies

or ixation

f

inter-s

seniority

f

incumbents

ppointed

hrough

oth he sources. owever,

f

the

selection

oes

o ake

place

n

a

single

rocess

nd

promotees

oin

heir

dutie

affer

gettingpromotion

ut

persons

nder

Limited

Departmental

xaminati

quota

r direct ecruitment

et

selectedfter ew months

r

years,

heycanno

be allowedo claim hat they should

e

granted

eniorityrom

he date

of

occurrence

r

year

of

vacancy. owever,t

has

beenmade lear

hat

quota

a

to

be

maintained.f

promotees

ategory

ets

appointedn excess

f

quota,

uc

surplus

uotapersons

re

o be adjusted

n availability

f

vacancies

heir

own

quota.

ut f there

s relaxationn

quota

y

a

conscious

ecision

n

erms

f

the

rules

nd egulationsnd ncumbentsreappointed

nder uch

elaxed

uot

then theywould

et

seniorityrom he

dateof

their

appointment.n

the acts

f

this casewe find

hat the decisionn the caseof

Central

Provident

Fund

r

:

-l_j

Commis'Sioner

AnotherVs. N. Ravindran

& Others

(supra)

s

applicabl

)


16/18

t,

)

T-84& 85-HR-2009

ewan hand

tc.

vs.

UOIetc.

In that

case

also

atioof

75:

25 between

romotees

ne

group

belonging

o


asis

and

other

group

belonging

o Examination

as

involved.

t was

held

hat

both

ategories

aveo be reated sbelongingo one

single

lass f

promotees

nd

promotion

s to be made

by

firstsatisfying

he

75olo

uota

f

those

ntitled

y seniority-cum-fitness

ule

and

hen

he 25olo

f

those ntitled y

passing

xamination

o

be

placed

elowhe said

75o/o.

n this

case,he applicantsave

pleaded

pecifically

hat he

vacancies

ere

available

within

heir

own

quota

f

75o/ond

unless

uch

uota

s satisfied,ecruitment

o

25%

quota

ould ot

be

made.n the

present

ase ame

ituationas

arisen.

Thus,we

areof the

view

hatsince pplicantsere

promoted

nder 5olo

Quota

in 2000whereas

ersons

nder

5%

quota

were

promoted

fter4

years

fter

qualifying

he

LDCE,

herefore,

rivate

espondents

annot laim

eniorityis

a

vis

75o/o

uotapromotees.

osition ould

have

beendifferent ad

promotion

under

5o/o

nd

25olo

DCEExamination,

eenmade in

oneslot n

same

ear.

Then, or obviouseason

heyhave

o

be

given

eniority

ccordingo

the ratio

f

any

ixed

nderelevant

ules r

nstructions

s

applicable.ince

he

question

f

determinationf seniorityf thousandsf employeess involved,he only

solution

hich

ppealso

the

reasons

that he

seniority ay

be

ixed

on

the

basis f dateon which

neb_ecomes

ember f the

service

articularly

hen

recruitment

s

not

made

n

one

process

nd

not

on hypothetical

asis,

s has

been

onewhilessuingmpugned

eniorftyists.

22.Thus,heseniorityf the nlumbents aveo bedeterminedn he

dates f heir ctual

oining

ndnotonnotional

asis y

allotmentf slots.f

the


17/18

lr

T-84

&

g5-HR_2009

Dewan

hand

tc.

vs.

UOI

etc.

recruitment

s

conducted

n

a

single

rocess

nd

promotions

are

ordered

n

the

same ateor occasion,necanunderstand

ase

f

the

respondents.

ut

n

this

'

case

where

he

LDCE

ould

ot

akeplace,

or

whatsoever

easons,

or

a

number

of

years

and

once

t

has

aken

ptace

ubsequenfly,

he pass

out

candidate

cannot

e

given

eniority

n

national

asis

f

year

of

vacancy,

hich

oncept

s

applicable

n

in

the

case

f

All

ndia

eruice

fficers.

n

any

case

ne

hing

s

more

han

clear

hat

his

a casewhereherota urehasbeen roken owndue

to

delay

n

making

ecruitment

rom

both

he

sources

nd

as

such

t

has

o

be

taken

hat

one

would

et

his

seniority

nly

rom

he

date

he

becomes

ember

f

the

service'

he

official

espondents

ave

dmitted

hat

competitive

xamination

could

ot

be

held

because

he

process

f

absorption

f

Group

officers

ncluding

sDE

(T)

in

BSNL

was

finarized

n

the year

2004-05 nd syrabusor the

examination

ad

o

be

revised

l

finarized.

he

vacancies

f

sDE T)

had

o

be

recalculated

etrospectively,

as

a result

f

cancellation

/

abolition

f

1g66

osts

of

TES

Group

retrospectively

nd

ransfer

f

posts

o

MTNL.

hequota

or

each

category

'e'

75o/o

nd

25o/o

being

maintained

rom

200r-02onwards.

23.

The

Respondents

ave

reried

upon

nstructions

ssuedby the

Government

f

India,

Department

f

Personnel

nd

Training

ssued

vide

oM

dated

'7'1986'

ara

.2

of

which

learly

rovides

hat

where

bsorbees

re

affected

gainst

pecific

uota

prescribed

n

the

recruitment

ules,

he

relative

seniority

f

such

absorbee's

is-i-vis

direct

ecruits

r

promotees

sha,

be

determined

ccording

o

the

rotation

f

vacancies

hich

hall

be

based

n

the

quota eserved

or promotion,

direct

ecruitment

ndpromotion

espectivery

ri


18/18

t \

I t r

T-84

& 85-HR-2009ewan

hand

tc.

vs.

UOIetc.

therecruitment

ules.

n this

case,

person

ho

has

become ember

f service

in 2004 s

soughto

be

placed

elow

ersons

ho

qualified

nexamination

n

.

the

basis

f a syllabus

rescribed

n

2006,

gainst

he

vacancy

f 1996

r so.

Thiskind

of approach

s

totally

nreasonable,

nwarranted

nd

llegal.

n

any

case,

fficial

espondents

ould

have

done

well

o issue

heir

own

nstructions

for

fixation

f

seniority

f

incumbents

hen

here

s

clash

of

interest

mongst

thousands

f

officers

nd

here

s huge

elay

n

making

election.

17.

In

view

of the

above

iscussion,

oth

hese

Original

pplications

re

'

allowed.

Orders/seniority

ists

mpugned

n

these

etitions

re

quashed

nd

set

,,,

aside.

he

respondents

re

directed

o

re-dr,aw

he

seniority

f

officers

f

TES

Group-B

n

the

basis

f

dates

f

joining

f incumbents,

s discussed

bove,

within

a

period

f

six

months

rom

he

date

of receipt

f

copy

of

this

order.

Before ndertakinguchexercise,espondents

ay

nvite

bjections

rom

he

persons

ikely

o

be

adversely

ffected

efore

e-drawing

eniority

s

observed

herein

bove.

o

costs.

lf, l,t

.,_-P

1

g+lil'ir'

1;|q;1

q1)

":

r-f.ilr,,,.,LtI-_--*

MEMB

YAM

tgMr2

t,,..-i,a,f;y1

. , i i + F f

'

;:::ild

' I

. .

.:,rlr:.1c,:nFf

' -

. . f : -

. . i j

: . , . _ . . . . " . . "

'

, , . , : f i : t

,

. t '

and

- r + r .

- , , , " * { * M {

J )

CAT Chandigarh Judgement

Documents