Department prepared a faulty seniority list which is against the promotees officers

My department has prepared a faulty seniority list for the year 2017. It is against the officers who have been promoted to the post. The officers of direct recruitment have gotten an edge over the promotees. We have been suffering huge losses on account of such a faulty seniority list. 

My department has prepared a faulty seniority list for the year 2017. It is against the officers who have been promoted to the post. The officers of direct recruitment have gotten an edge over the promotees. We have been suffering huge losses on account of such a faulty seniority list. 

There is a fixed quota of vacancies reserved for the direct recruitment and promotion respectively. Therefore, if any vacancy remains unfilled in the respective quota it shall carry forward for the next year. In the next vacancy year the rule of quota shall apply thereto in the same manner.

Principle for preparing inter se seniority list

If the department is going to filling the unfilled quota of promotees from the officer of direct recruitment or the vice versa, that promotion is illegal and against the office memorandum 4-03-2014. When the department commits mistake or deliberately ignores the principle of inter-se seniority consequently officers of direct recruitment have been placed above the promotees such a seniority list is illegal and liable to be quashed.

This is against the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court in N.R. Parmar Vs. Union of India and Ors., (2012) 13 SCC 340. The Supreme Court thus held that the basic principle for determining the seniority shall be the rotation of vacancies between direct recruits and promotees.

The Supreme Court in K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors. Vs. Ningam Siro & Ors. (2020)5 SCC 689 has categorically held that a person cannot be entitled to claim seniority from the date he was not in government service.

Therefore, if the officer of direct recruitment has been placed in the seniority list in promotee quota for the year to which he was not in service, his seniority is illegal. 

In this situation you should file an original application before the Central Administrative Tribunal. You should demand for quashing or set aside of impugned final or draft seniority list as the case may be. 


Question: Based on Meghachandra decision on inter-se seniority between Direct Recruits and Promotees, DoPT has issued an OM dated 13.08.2021. and said those who joined between Parmer's judgement and Meghachandra judgement, seniority list will be prepared based on Parmer judgement.  But Meghachandra judgement said the order is prospective. So is DoPT OM contradictory to Meghachandra judgement?

Asked from: New Delhi

The decision of the department is erroneous because the judgment of Parmar has been overruled by the judgment in Meghachandra. That employees are not entitled to claim seniority from the date of advertisement. There seniority shall be considered only from the date of appointment.

This is explicitly held by the Supreme Court in Meghachandra's case. The office memorandum dated 13-08-2021 is illegal and violative of dictum of Meghachandra. In this situtation, you should file a OA before the Central Administrative Tribunal for staying the preparation of seniority list.

Tags:

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Terminated from service for mere misconduct

This legal guidance explains the remedies available to an employee terminated from service for alleged misconduct without proper inquiry or proportional punishment. It discusses principles of natural justice, departmental proceedings, wrongful termination, reinstatement, back wages, and the legal remedies available before labour courts, tribunals, or constitutional courts.

Salary during termination period is illegally stopped by the department

This article discusses the legality of withholding salary during the period of termination or suspension from service. It examines the rights of an employee to claim salary, subsistence allowance, and other consequential benefits where the departmental action is alleged to be arbitrary, illegal, or contrary to service rules and principles of natural justice.

Daily wager service is terminated on misbehavior

This article discusses the legal implications of termination of service of a daily wager on allegations of misconduct or misbehavior. It examines whether principles of natural justice, departmental inquiry, and opportunity of hearing are required before terminating the services of a temporary or daily wage employee, along with the remedies available under labour and service laws.

Terminated from service by following illegal proceedings

This article examines the legality of termination orders passed after defective or unlawful departmental proceedings. It discusses violations of principles of natural justice, procedural irregularities in disciplinary inquiries, denial of reasonable opportunity of hearing, and the remedies available to an employee against illegal termination from service.