BHAGWAN DAS Vs. INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition involves the familiar rivalry between promotees and direct recruits. Normally a resolution of such a dispute between these two well known groups of service employees would necessitate consideration of various decisions relating to the quota and rota rule and such other allied matters. We have been relieved of this exercise because we feel that the dispute in this case can be resolved on facts unaided by precedents on such matters. The counsel. on both sides advisedly, therefore, restrained themselves from citing the relevant authorities before us.

(2.) Now the facts: All the 39 petitioners are promotees to the post of Assistant in the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (for short 'the Society') the 1st respondent herein. The second respondent is the Union of India and respondents Nos. 3 to 31 are direct recruits to the same post. Respondents Nos. 32 to 88 are also promotees and have been impleaded as pro forma respondents.

(3.) The petitioners originally belonged to the service of the Central Secretariat, Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture. The Society was a part of that department till 1-4-1965 on which date the Government of India decided to reorganise the Society into a fully autonomous organisation with its own secretariat. The petitioners opted to join the service in the Society on such reorganisation. Respondents Nos. 3 to 31 were directly recruited after an open competitive test held by the Society in 1967 and 1971. A seniority list was prepared by the Society in 1976 showing the relative positions of the promotees and the direct recruits. The provocation for filing the writ petition was the publishing of a second seniority list, by the Society by its Memorandum No. 27(5)/81-Estt. II dated 7-4-1981. This list brought changes in the earlier list and pushed down the promotees from the positions they occupied in that list. The prayer in the writ petition is to quash this seniority list on the ground that it violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and to stay its implementation.