S D RAGHUNANDAN SINGH M RATHNAKAR PRABHU V NARAYANAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA:J N SHIVAJI RAO:STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) No order on the application for the impleading parties but counsel heard.

(2.) The facts leading to these appeals, briefly stated, are as under: On 18th April, 1956, 10 posts of First Division Clerks were sanctioned by the Government of Mysore in the Department of Sales Tax. On reorganisation of the States with effect from 1st November, 1956, a large number of clerks in the Commercial Tax Department of the State of Bombay stood allocated to the State of Mysore, now Karnataka. The said clerks were treated as equivalent to Second Division Clerks in the State of Mysore by the Central Government. Thereafter, with effect from 23rd November, 1957, additional 93 posts of First Division Clerks came to be created in addition to the existing 90 posts and 10 other posts of First Division Clerks in the Department. Earlier to the creation of the 93 additional posts, the State Public Service Commission had invited applications for filling up 10 posts in the cadre of First Division Clerks. After the reorganisation of the State and the creation of 93 new posts, the State Public Service Commission issued a fresh advertisement inviting applications for filling up the said posts. The advertisement also stated that those who had already applied in response to the first advertisement, need not apply again. Ultimately, the Commission recommended 132 names for appointment to the existing vacancies. The State Government by an order made sometimes in January, 1958, appointed 73 candidates from the list forwarded by the Commission. The letters of appointment issued to these 73 direct recruits indicated that their appointments were against the 93 post created on 23rd November, 1957. What happened thereafter, led to a controversy between the newly appointed direct recruits and respondents 4 to 81 before the High Court who were promoted as First Division Clerks in October, 1959 and thereafter. These promoted First Division Clerks were later given deemed date retrospective promotion with effect from 23rd November, 1957. On account of this retrospective promotion, the 73 direct recruits were required to slide down in seniority and, therefore, they filed a Writ Petition No. 7327 of 1969 challenging the Government decision. The writ petition was heard by a learned single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka, who, by his judgment and order dated 26th July, 1973, dismissed the petition. Against the said dismissal, the direct recruits, original petitioners, filed an appeal before a Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench by its order dated 27th March, 1979 allowed the appeal and reversed the judgment of the learned single Judge holding that since the 73 direct recruits occupied the additionally created posts, the promotees could not have been given retrospective promotion from 23rd November, 1957 as it would result in both the promotees and the direct recruits occupying the very same 73 out of 93 posts which was irreconcilable. If the situation is viewed differently it would appear that once the promotees occupied the 93 posts from the date they were created on 23rd November, 1957, the direct recruits could not be adjusted against the 73 of the 93 posts and their- appointments would be in jeopardy. In that view of the matter, the Division Bench, while reversing the decision of the learned single Judge, directed as under:

(3.) Pursuant to the decision of the Division Bench, the State Government undertook a review as per its Memorandum dated 5th April, 1980. This review was of course subject to the decision that may be rendered by this Court in Civil Appeals Nos. 2821-22 of 1980. According to this review, all the 73 direct recruits were placed above the promotees on the plea that under the Karnataka State Civil Services (Regulations of Promotion, Pay and Pension) Act, 1973, which had come into force before the Division Bench disposed of the appeal, no retrospective promotion could 'be granted. This review was the subject - matter of challenge in 3 applications filed by the promotees before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal at Bangalore. All the 3 applications were disposed of by a common order dated 11th March, 1988. By order the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the review was not strictly in c with the order of the Division Bench the said conclusion conformity Bench and in particular paragraphs 10 and 13 thereof. The Tribunal, therefore, set aside the review order and gave the following directions: