Summary
Promotees and direct recruits were selected through a common requisition as Assistant Radio Officers in the U.P. Police Radio Department. The promotees were appointed months before the direct recruits. In 2012 the High Court had found that appointing them without a combined selection list breached Rules 17 and 22 of the 1979 Rules, and that finding had become final. The 2013 list ranked candidates by quota and rota against the vacancy year. The Supreme Court held that a selection list fills vacancies but does not fix seniority, which depends on entry into the cadre. To end a three-decade dispute, it used Article 142 to treat both streams as entering the cadre on 30.01.1996 and directed seniority to be recast, without disturbing benefits already enjoyed.
Issues
- How the inter se seniority of promotee and direct recruit Assistant Radio Officers, selected through a common requisition but appointed on different dates in breach of Rule 17 of the U.P. Police Radio Service Rules, 1979, is to be determined.
Provisions considered
- Rules 5, 17 and 22, Uttar Pradesh Police Radio Service Rules, 1979Rule 17 governs the combined selection list apportioning vacancies between the two sources in the prescribed ratio, while Rule 22 fixes seniority from the date of substantive appointment, with intra-stream seniority as determined at selection or promotion. (¶¶ 4, 13, 15, 17)
- Article 142, Constitution of IndiaRather than remand a dispute pending for about three decades, the Court fixed a common date of entry into the cadre for both streams. (¶¶ 15, 17)
Held
- Although seniority ordinarily follows entry into the cadre (Ashok Kumar Srivastava), the earlier High Court finding that appointments without a combined selection list breached Rules 17 and 22 has attained finality between the parties and cannot be reopened. (¶¶ 11, 13)
- A selection list under Rule 17 only determines how vacancies are filled and does not itself fix seniority, which under Rule 22 depends on the date of appointment; ranking by quota and rota against the vacancy year was contrary to that scheme. (¶¶ 13, 14, 15)
- Since selection from both streams was through a common process, both are treated as entering the cadre on 30.01.1996, the date of the promotees' appointment letters, with intra-stream seniority under Rule 22 and posts of dead or superannuated officers filled as fresh vacancies; benefits already enjoyed under the 2014 judgment are not disturbed, and those who gain from the recast list get benefits, notional for retirees. (¶¶ 15, 16, 17, 18)
Result
Civil Appeal No. 1838 of 2018 disposed of; the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) judgment dated 22.07.2014 in S.B. No. 1619 of 2013 modified, with seniority directed to be recast treating both streams as entering the cadre on 30.01.1996; no costs.